The Superannuation Complaints Tribunal (SCT) should remain independent from Government and the regulators, according to Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA) chief executive Pauline Vamos.
Speaking at a Super Review breakfast event this morning, Vamos said that while there was a regulatory gap in the case of the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), the SCT as a consumer representative body should remain a separate entity.
Vamos said that between the Financial Ombudsman Service and the SCT, the dispute resolution process had become “murky” but that, despite a Senate enquiry, the process should not involve the regulators.
“I have a view that a dispute resolution process for consumers must be as independent as possible from the regulator - they’re different roles,” she said.
Vamos said however that the superannuation industry was required to adhere to the requirements of two regulatory bodies, which was not only onerous but included a lot of overlap.
Super funds had different disclosure requirements and paid multiple levies, creating duplication in the system which needed to be assessed.
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.
Big business has joined the chorus of opposition against the proposed Division 296 tax.