APRA's cone of silence on MTAA Super

One of Australia’s key financial regulators has refused to answer questions from a Parliamentary Committee relating to events surrounding MTAA Super, citing the limitations imposed by legislation.

The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) has declined to substantially answer questions on notice from Liberal Senator David Bushby during Budget Estimates relating to problems associated with MTAA Super, including the regulator’s decision to appoint a special counsel and whether APRA had sufficient resources to conduct investigations.

Instead, APRA cited section 56 of the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority Act 1988 which it said precluded it “from disclosing information disclosed or obtained under or for the purposes of a prudential framework law and relating to the affairs of a regulated entity”.

It said: “APRA is not even able to comment on whether or not the press speculation is accurate or not”.

Senator Bushby had asked APRA the nature of the mandate and powers it had conferred on a special counsel in relation to MTAA and the cost of appointing a special counsel.

He also asked how long APRA had been taking a special interest in MTAA, beyond the regulatory effort allocated to a super fund of MTAA’s size, and what cost both salary and non-salary APRA had incurred.

Bushby also asked if the regulator was satisfied that the current MTAA Board of Trustees was a workable and cooperative body and, if not, what measures the regulator would take to ensure member moneys were protected.