Super trustees need better vigilance: APRABY EMMA RAPAPORT | MONDAY, 27 MAR 2017 12:43PM![]() APRA's deputy chair Helen Rowell hit out at superannuation trustees who incur "inappropriate expenditures" saying that unnecessary costs negatively affect outcomes for members. Related News |
Editor's Choice
ASIC issues 'wake-up call' to trustees on member complaints
The corporate regulator is calling on superannuation trustees to improve oversight of issues arising from member complaints, noting many are not doing enough to use complaints as early warning signs of broader issues.
Aware Super expands Challenger partnership for lifetime income solution
Aware Super has moved to expand its retirement income offering through a partnership with annuity provider Challenger, as superannuation funds face growing pressure to help members turn accumulated savings into sustainable income.
FBI accuses North Korea of $9bn Binance crypto heist
North Korea has been accused of being the culprit behind the $9 billion (US$6.3bn) cryptocurrency heist from global digital asset platform Binance that took place last week.
ASIC takes action on Falcon Capital directors
ASIC is suing the directors of Falcon Capital, the responsible entity for the failed First Guardian Master Fund, alleging "serious and widespread failures" in their oversight.
Further Reading
Products
Expert Feed
Featured Profile

Jacqueline Fernley
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
ARC POINT OCIO PTY LTD
ARC POINT OCIO PTY LTD
Jacqueline Fernley is a self-confessed nerd, a market animal and as of this year, her own boss. Riddhima Talwani writes.








The issue I see is APRA's interpretation of what makes a person independent because each person will have a past history which will influence their decision-making processes. We all carry some baggage from our past whether we come from the employer or employee side, so can anyone be truly independent?
Surely it should be about what skills and abilities a person has rather than are they are 'independent'. By adding independent trustees to the board aren't we just adding to the cost, yet APRA also say that's a major issue? So which is it?
The decision to merge or close a fund should sit with the members and in fact it does. If a member is unhappy they can move to another Fund or is APRA saying members do not understand?
If that's the case why not spend money educating Australians of their rights instead of lecturing funds that they should make the decision without even consulting their members?