Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
moneymanagement logo
 
 

ASFA rejects multiple super fund directorships

trustee/ASFA/superannuation-funds/association-of-superannuation-funds/director/treasury/chief-executive/

14 February 2014
| By Staff |
image
image image
expand image

The Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA) has drawn a line in the sand on people holding multiple superannuation fund trustee directorships, arguing that there should be “a ban on multiple trustee board directorships in certain circumstances”. 

In a submission responding to a Treasury discussion paper on superannuation fund governance, ASFA chief executive Pauline Vamos has clearly outlined her organisation’s independent stance on the issue and its concern that holding of multiple trustee directorships can given rise to conflicts of interest. 

The ASFA submission goes much further on the question than organisations representing industry funds. 

The submission said it was not uncommon for one individual to be a director on more than one superannuation fund trustee board. 

“There are also situations where a professional trustee company, with the same board (composed of the same directors), acts as the trustee for multiple funds, often including public offer funds that may be competing in the same space,” it said. “Such situations lead to the potential for conflicts of interest or conflicts of duty to arise. 

“Our view is that, with the exception of closed defined benefit corporate funds and related funds, an individual should not be allowed to be a trustee or director on more than one APRA-regulated superannuation fund trustee,” the submission said. 

“In particular, ASFA considers that: 

- An individual who is on more than one trustee board cannot properly fulfil their fiduciary duties to the beneficiaries of each fund simultaneously. 

- The presence of that individual on multiple trustee boards would be likely to compromise discussion at board level to some extent. That is, their presence would impact on the ability or willingness of other board members to discuss issues which may be commercially sensitive or involving proprietary information. 

- Despite the fact that multiple trustee board memberships do occur at present, the negative perception that arises as result of the conflicts which arise from this is unacceptable. This negative perception is not just limited to the funds in question. It has the potential to detrimentally affect the reputation of the entire industry, particularly the public’s perception of the industry’s governance practices.” 

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

The succession dilemma is more than just a matter of commitments.This isn’t simply about younger vs. older advisers. It’...

5 days 15 hours ago

Significant ethical issues there. If a relationship is in the process of breaking down then both parties are likely to b...

4 weeks 2 days ago

It's not licensees not putting them on, it's small businesses (that are licensed) that cannot afford to put them on. The...

1 month ago

ASIC has released the results of the latest adviser exam, with August’s pass mark improving on the sitting from a year ago. ...

1 week 1 day ago

The inquiry into the collapse of Dixon Advisory and broader wealth management companies by the Senate economics references committee will not be re-adopted. ...

2 weeks 1 day ago

While the profession continues to see consolidation at the top, Adviser Ratings has compared the business models of Insignia and Entireti and how they are shaping the pro...

2 weeks 3 days ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND