Remove barriers to infrastructure investment, says FSC
The Government must remove a number of structural, regulatory and political issues that must be resolved before the $1.3 trillion in superannuation saving can be utilised to finance Australia's infrastructure needs, according to the Financial Services Council (FSC).
Ernst & Young has produced a report for the FSC which argues that the current 5-10 per cent allocation to infrastructure in superannuation funds can be improved if certain barriers to investment are removed.
These obstacles include a lack of a clear project pipeline and Government commitment; a lack of suitably structured projects for institutional investment; inconsistent, complex and expensive bidding processes; and regulatory pressures.
"The Government took the first steps in removing the barriers to ongoing investment in infrastructure in the Federal Budget this year," said FSC chief executive Jon Brogden.
The FSC/Ernst & Young report said further investment could be stimulated by using the existing Infrastructure Australia priority project list to create a pipeline of Government-sponsored projects. Recycling Government capital in infrastructure assets more efficiently and simplifying the bidding process would also help, according to the report.
"However, let's be clear - superannuation is not a cash cow to fund particular economic ills in Australia. A fund's first duty is to its members and ensuring investment returns are maximised," Brogden said.
Recommended for you
The FSCP has announced its latest verdict, suspending an adviser’s registration for failing to comply with his obligations when providing advice to three clients.
Having sold Madison to Infocus earlier this year, Clime has now set up a new financial advice licensee with eight advisers.
With licensees such as Insignia looking to AI for advice efficiencies, they are being urged to write clear AI policies as soon as possible to prevent a “Wild West” of providers being used by their practices.
Iress has revealed the number of clients per adviser that top advice firms serve, as well as how many client meetings they conduct each week.
