Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 90

Sustainability of the super system in a time of disruption

Pauline Vamos is Chief Executive Officer of The Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA). This is an extract from her keynote speech at the ASFA Conference on 13 November 2014.

 

It could be said that the super system is always facing disruption. We know that as the system grows and as average account balances increase, tax concessions also grow, putting pressure on governments to take a look at super as a source of revenue, or as a potential source of tax savings.

We also know that as the demographics of the community shift and their expectations of a ‘comfortable retirement’ continue to grow, the system will be constantly reviewed, scrutinised and changed. While this will no doubt pose its challenges, in my view super is at the core of both the community and the government’s ability to respond to a rapidly changing environment.

Yesterday we heard thoughts on how the industry should ‘step up’; on how the system should be designed in the future; and on how we should respond to our technology-savvy, device-driven members.

These thoughts and messages will continue to be a theme throughout the Conference, as it is our aim to turn your focus to how we can ‘step up’ as an industry, how your organisation can ‘step up’ and how you can ‘step up’ personally. These three tasks have one universal element – they all involve leadership.

In this session, I will focus on how the industry can ‘step up’ and ensure the sustainability of the system in a time of disruption.

A plea to come together

But let’s talk about ‘us’ first. The industry needs to come together, not so much so that various sectors can compromise, but instead to meet with a common mindset - one where, as an industry, we collectively put ourselves in the shoes of our members and those of the broader community.

I’m sure most of you will be thinking that your first priority is always to the members of your fund. It’s true that your primary obligation should be to your members. But in my mind you cannot and will not meet your obligations to the members of your fund unless you also think about how well the system is delivered to the general community via the collective industry.

On some things we must work together for the collective as well as the individual good.

So what do I mean by that? I like to think of the system as a bit like a road network. As industry participants, we are all delivering the same system, albeit through our different respective vehicles.

The system can be viewed as the road on which we drive these vehicles. Without it, the vehicles would have little purpose for existence, so while we are all in a fiercely competitive race, we also have a responsibility to build and maintain the roads, abide by the same road signs and ensure that the community is safe and secure as they navigate its turns.

As a compulsory industry, it is also our collective responsibility to make sure that they get to their desired destination, no matter what vehicle they choose to go in.

While some of the road building and signage is the responsibility of governments and regulators, many of its elements are our responsibility. True leadership means we both recognise and deliver on that responsibility. We are responsible for the brand of industry and for the effectiveness of the system delivery and there are many parts that can only be delivered collectively.

This means we need to make a greater effort to agree on those issues where, in order for us to deliver to our individual members, we must take a collaborative and cooperative approach.

Sometimes we do need to put short term competition aside to focus on enhancing governance, efficiency, transparency and accountability for fund members, and improve the community’s experience with superannuation.

The more we do this, the more our voice will have credibility when we advocate for good policy.

Standards of governance encompass the system as well as individual funds. Governance of the system is a shared responsibility – the brand and reputation of your organisation is closely linked to the brand and reputation of the industry.

We must focus on what governance structures including regulatory structures we need for the future as we move to income streams and the world continues to increase in complexity.

ASFA’s position on fund governance is clear: conflicts of interest that limit a trustee’s ability to meet its fiduciary obligations must be removed and there must be enough flexibility in the appointment process, and board structures, to ensure the right people, with the right skills, experience and knowledge, are guiding the fund towards the best outcomes for its members.

We have conflicts in all sectors. Let’s not be blind to them. Let’s address them.

Focus on transparency and accountability

Transparency and accountability are huge topics. Within these, I believe there are three things we need to focus on:

The first is fee disclosure. I know there are many issues and many legitimate reasons why there have been a number of different interpretations when it comes to the requirement to disclose fees. However, you only need to read through the pages of the FSI interim report to know that fees will continue to be a big issue for super.

The community wants better clarity around what they are paying for, and also to have the ability to compare fees from fund to fund. Therefore we need a plan to fix the issues surrounding fee disclosure, and we need to do this as a matter of urgency, before the media debate over fees overtakes sound policy thinking in this area.

The second is improving the way we measure risk, and communicate risk to fund members. The current version of the Standard Risk Measure has its critics and there are real concerns about using it as a disclosure tool. But consumers and regulators are looking for ways to better understand risk, so let’s adjust the measure so it meets both prudential and consumer needs.

The third area is a new one for us. How do we actually measure and disclose the value of an income stream. If I retire with a lump sum, how do I make the choice as to which income stream is going to suit me best in terms of cost, return, longevity and level of guarantee? We cannot expect the income stream product market to be opened up if we do not tackle this issue. It’s important for the industry to step up and put forward a practical design to Treasury and regulators.

 

Pauline Vamos is Chief Executive Officer of The Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA). This is an extract from her keynote speech at the 2014 ASFA Conference. The full speech is linked here.

 

  •   28 November 2014
  • 1
  •      
  •   
1 Comments
Ramani
November 28, 2014

Given the largish nature of the subject and the audience to which Pauline directed her remarks, the summary does justice to important issues. Given the spectrum of constituents ASFA covers (retail, industry, corporate, exempt public sector, 'opted in' public sector, SAFs - with all their historic and newly confected tensions), praise is due to ASFA for herding the felines for members' benefit.

Three subjects I would have liked to have been touched upon are short-termism, risk management and the approach to constant changes.

Short-termism is toxic to an industry engineered for the long term through accumulation, transition-to-retirement and withdrawal phases. Except in the limiting case of terminal illness, this is counter-productive especially in our DC model where risks are borne by members afflicted by semi-literacy (if that), disengagement and the behavioural propensity to view death and its proxies such as old age as 'what happens to others'. While agreeing with this conceptually, the practice of carping on short term performance (especially in good times, while falling eerily silent when performance tanks needs a debate. The article glorifying short-termism in the Economist of 22 November does not apply to long term wealth creation.

Risk management is receiving significant attention thanks to past mistakes, Stronger Super and the enlightened practices of some funds. Relative to banking and insurance, however, super lags, and can learn a lot in respect of counterparty, country, industry and operational risks. The adolescent attitude in super 'we are different' misses out on others' lessons.

Constant changes evoke mixed responses from the industry. At its core is the behavioural reaction 'any change that benefits us is good, others are tinkering'. Thus SG hikes, removal of RBLs and tax exemption on post 60 benefits pass without opposition, while mooted changes to pension taxation, deferral of proposed SG increases and governance reforms (the record from retail and industry sectors needs improvement) face stringent opposition. Super joins taxation in being agnostic to equity or symmetry. The reality is that super changes will (as Pauline hints) continue. You cannot overshadow the national GDP and be immune from government imperatives.

We have a good system, but far short of where it can be. ASFA can help in enlightened self-interest.

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Is the Retirement Income Covenant really the right answer?

Questions remain on legislating the objective of superannuation

Six ways the Budget Office is probing super taxes

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Are you making these SMSF mistakes?

After four decades advising investors, there are a few common mistakes I've seen SMSF investors make. From holding too much cash and chasing yield to overtrading and trusting tips. Are these errors costing you?

Why have Australian living standards 'fallen' and how do we fix it?

For the last few years there has been much talk of a 'cost-of-living' crisis in Australia and of 'falling living standards'. Lately this has flared up again with the pickup in inflation resulting in a renewed fall in real wages.

Retirement spending is not one-size-fits-all

New data challenges the idea that Australians are underspending their super. The bigger issue may be helping retirees navigate complexity, make confident decisions and use their savings to support security, wellbeing and choice.

Will you run out of money in retirement?

Fear of running out has become a defining retirement anxiety. Why do some retirees die with substantial wealth while others deplete their nest egg? Evidence suggests the answer is more complicated than we think. 

Four options for an income investor’s next dollar

What if Australia’s golden age of dividends is ending? Rather than overhaul your portfolio, it may be worth considering where new capital can work harder. I discuss four income strategies and the trade-offs behind each.

The missing link in the CGT debate

A little-noticed consequence of Labor’s tax changes could have implications well beyond investors’ tax bills. The issue raises bigger questions about incentives, capital allocation and the drivers of long-term economic growth.

Latest Updates

SMSF strategies

Meg on SMSFs: What do we think about reversionary pensions these days?

Reversionary pensions have long been a staple of SMSF estate planning, but are they still the best option? Meg Heffron revisits a once-clear favourite and asks whether changing super rules have shifted the balance.

The ageing ‘crisis’ has not and will not happen

Rising age dependency is frequently treated as a warning sign for economies. But when actual workforce participation is examined, a strikingly different picture emerges about ageing, productivity and economic sustainability.

Retirement

How does the 4% rule stack up?

The 4% rule has long been retirement's gold standard. But after a difficult period for investors, fresh analysis suggests a more conservative approach may significantly improve the chances of making savings last.

Shares

Four charts that expose market concentration risk

Investors have recently been rewarded for backing market leaders, but history suggests this eventually comes at a cost. Now may be the time to review whether your portfolio is carrying unintended risks beneath the surface.

Investment strategies

The case for gearing beyond property

Most Australians gear into property but ignore shares. That may be a mistake. Used carefully, geared equity strategies can enhance long-term returns, reduce cash tied up in growth assets and support retirement income goals.

Economy

Australia's $1 trillion debt pile

The headlines exclaiming that Australian government debt has hit A$1 trillion and US government debt has hit $40 trillion has turned heads, but how serious are they really? Will Australia's mix of debt create challenges?

Economy

Has 100 years of growth made us any happier?

For decades, GDP has been the benchmark for economic success, but has it made us materially happier? If happiness does not rise in lockstep with prosperity, are we overlooking what constitutes a successful society?

Sponsors

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

© 2026 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.