Dissenting report draws battlelines on AFCA

18 October 2017
| By Mike |
image
image
expand image

Australian Labor Party members of a Senate Committee reviewing the Government’s legislation setting up the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) has strongly rejected the need for the body and criticised the manner in which it is being set up.

In dissenting comments suggesting the Government may struggle to have the necessary numbers for the legislation to pass both houses of Parliament, the Labor Senators have attributed the attempted formation of the AFCA to being part of the Government’s attempts to avoid holding a Royal Commission into the Banking and Financial Services sectors.

For their part, the Government Senators on the committee have urged the passage of the bill, but the make-up of the Senate makes this far from a certain proposition. At the very least, the Labor Party has signalled it will fight hard to retain the role of the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal (SCT).

The dissenting comments from the Labor senators said the inquiry had “clearly shown that the Government’s new ‘one-stop-shop’ complaints authority will not have any new or additional powers that existing disputes resolution bodies don’t already have” and labelled it “largely a rebranding exercise”.

However, it said that in relation to superannuation disputes, which are currently dealt with by the statutory Superannuation Complaints Tribunal, “the bill is much worse than a rebranding exercise and will weaken outcomes and protections for consumers”.

“Superannuation complaints should continue to be dealt with by the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal, which should not be abolished,” the dissenting report said.

The dissenting report concluded on the note: “This bill appears to be more about politics than policy. This bill is no substitute for a royal commission and is not the tribunal that the Prime Minister promised”.

“Labor senators are of the view that the new AFCA should not include the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal's jurisdiction in relation to superannuation disputes. No persuasive case has been made that the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal should be abolished; in fact evidence received by the committee demonstrates the opposite. The Superannuation Complaints Tribunal should be retained.”

Read more about:

AUTHOR

 

Recommended for you

 

MARKET INSIGHTS

sub-bg sidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

Squeaky'21

My view is that after 2026 there will be quite a bit less than 10,000 'advisers' (investment advisers) and less than 100...

1 week 1 day ago
Jason Warlond

Dugald makes a great point that not everyone's definition of green is the same and gives a good example. Funds have bee...

1 week 1 day ago
Jasmin Jakupovic

How did they get the AFSL in the first place? Given the green light by ASIC. This is terrible example of ASIC's incompet...

1 week 2 days ago

AustralianSuper and Australian Retirement Trust have posted the financial results for the 2022–23 financial year for their combined 5.3 million members....

9 months 2 weeks ago

A $34 billion fund has come out on top with a 13.3 per cent return in the last 12 months, beating out mega funds like Australian Retirement Trust and Aware Super. ...

9 months ago

The verdict in the class action case against AMP Financial Planning has been delivered in the Federal Court by Justice Moshinsky....

9 months 2 weeks ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND