The Financial Services Council (FSC) and the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA) have argued that director remuneration must be publicly disclosed.
The two industry bodies made the call in separate submissions to an Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) discussion paper.
ASFA said in its submission that the requirement should not focus on the person's total remuneration, but rather on the component that pays them for carrying out their duties as a trustee director.
The FSC took a similar line, while stating that the remuneration of responsible persons by superannuation funds was one of the most relevant issues to members.
"Remuneration of responsible persons which is drawn from the trust should be disclosed to members," the FSC said. "Remuneration which is not paid from trust assets should not be disclosed unless it is captured by other disclosure requirements."
The FSC submission said that, for instance, where executives were required to disclose their remuneration under the Corporations Act 2001 or the ASX Corporate Governance Guidelines, this should continue to apply to listed entities which contained Registrable Superannuation Entity Licensees.
A major super fund has defended its use of private markets in a submission to ASIC, asserting that appropriate governance and information-sharing practices are present in both public and private markets.
A member body representing some prominent wealth managers is concerned super funds’ dominance is sidelining small companies in capital markets.
Earlier this month, several Australian superannuation funds fell victim to credential stuffing attacks, which saw a small number of members lose more than $500,000.
Small- to medium-sized funds have become collateral damage in an "imperfect" model for super industry levies, a financial institution has said.