Add new comment

They will be the first to be appointed...just watch...along with a plethora of groups with strong anti -adviser sentiment and ideology and left wing political connections.
There is a whole bunch of political agitators who make an entire career out of advisory body involvement,advocacy boards and think tanks.
I have significant concerns over where Jane Hume's loyalty really is based.
The Industry Funds would be over the moon they have a previous convert in the midst of current Govt and the silence that Hume has chosen during the FASEA Board debacle and the consumer group based Directors , is starting to appear consistent with where her position is held.
The radical stance that these so called consumer groups take is nearly always focused on remuneration and fees.
This is because they all have an ideological objection to paying commercial costs for just about anything.
Superannuation is a business,first and foremost. It is not a charity, even though many in left wing land would probably like to see a massive socialist style centralised retirement fund for all.
Industry Funds are run as massive, money making ventures and the perception that they are only run for the benefit of the members is just that.
Businesses and shareholders such as Frontier Advisors Pty Ltd, Industry Super Holdings Pty Ltd, Industry Funds Management Pty Ltd , Industry Fund Services Pty Ltd, Industry Super Australia Pty Ltd and The New Daily Pty Ltd are all associated organisations that have made massive profits off the back of Industry Fund involvement and shareholding. There has been a history of a particular long term Director and Chair of the Board (now ceased) of a very large, well known Industry Fund who also held a Directorship of Frontier Advisors Pty Ltd which received the payment of fees from that organisation whilst that same super fund also held shares in that very business and provided services to that fund for a very large sum of money.
So, a Director and Chair of a large Industry Fund was also a shareholder in an organisation in which the super fund itself had a 31% shareholding as at 30 June, 2018 and that organisation provided services to that same super fund .
.....and this is not considered a problem or a conflict of interest ????
.......and this would be all in the best interest of their members and the best interest of consumers?....yes ?