Super trustees need better vigilance: APRABY EMMA RAPAPORT | MONDAY, 27 MAR 2017 12:43PMAPRA'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
Jo Townsend named chief executive of NZ Super
One of Australia's most experienced superannuation executives will take the helm of New Zealand's sovereign wealth fund, following Matt Whineray's departure late last year.
QMV Legal folds, managing partner to launch new firm
Novigi will wind up QMV Legal as its managing partner Jonathan Steffanoni embarks on launching a new specialist superannuation law firm.
Best super fund products revealed
The best superannuation fund products, based on factors such as investment performance, insurance, fees, and organisational strength, have been named.
Platinum bleeds $1.4bn in outflows
Platinum Investment Management flags it will lose at least $1.4 billion as a partial redemption from institutional clients over the next month, translating to an $18 million hit to revenue.
Products
Featured Profile
Fiona Mann
HEAD OF LISTED EQUITIES AND ESG
BRIGHTER SUPER
BRIGHTER SUPER
Brighter Super head of listed equities and ESG Fiona Mann was shaped by a childhood steeped in military-like discipline and global nomadism. Andrew McKean 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?