The Royal Commission has questioned whether the Superannuation Industry Supervision (SIS) Act should be amended to preclude the type of advertising put in place by Industry Super Australia and funded by major industry funds such as AustralianSuper.
The Royal Commission has also been told that it is open to the Commission to find that hospitality industry fund Hostplus may have engaged in conduct falling below community standards and expectations in communications which did not take members best interests into account.
The Royal Commission has also questioned the corporate hospitality spending of Hostplus and suggested that the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act (SIS Act) could be amended to preclude such activity in future.
But while finding that the SIS Act could be amended to better cover political advertising and corporate hospitality, counsel assisting the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry, Michael Hodge QC stopped short of finding any wrongdoing on the part of AustralianSuper.
His closing submission said it was not open to the Commissioner, Kenneth Hayne, to find any of the conduct raised at the Royal Commission constituted misconduct falling short of community standards and expectations.
This compared with counsel assisting’s approach to National Australia Bank, the Commonwealth Bank and IOOF.
Hodge suggested that in relation to NAB it was open to the Commission to find there had been both misconduct and conduct falling below community expectations with respect to transfer to MySuper, trailing commissions and fee for no service.
In relation to IOOF, Hodge suggested that it was open to the Commissioner to find the company had been guilty of misconduct and conduct falling below community expectations.
Hodge also suggested that Commonwealth Bank was also open to findings that its conduct had fallen below community standards and expectations across its handling of a range of issues including in relation to the selling of superannuation products via bank branches and fee for no service.
Comments
But its still cool to label property and infrastructure as 'defensive' assets so you can call your high growth fund "balanced' to make misleading performance comparisons? That way you can say you have the best performing balanced fund although you've underperformed the index based on a comparative risk asset allocation.
No worries, carry on. Just making sure.
Royal Circus replete with clowns running the whole thing and a big fat elephant in the ring, but was never mentioned. What a effing farce, waste of tax payers money and travesty of any form of ethical unbiased investigation. These inepts Hodge & Hayne need to be hung out to dry with their panderingly sick questioning of the ISA investigated in itself. Sickening mewling turds.
Wow, even when an independent umpire investigating bank super and industry super says banks are way worse you still trot out the same old rubbish regarding ISA. Facts and reasoning obviously aren't your strong point Anon2. Next thing you'll be calling the Royal Commission fake news!
Bang on MJMW; nothing will change these peoples minds, they've been brainwashed.
Choice Magazine and GetUp staff are logging on early this morning after a long weekend of entertainment at the footy.
Bigfoot in bigmouth? Start researching properly into the ISA funds operations, reports, methodology, payments, valuations, fees and then please, when you have your Bigpants on, come back to have a discussion with the Bigboys, lightweight.
No worries Big Boy John, sounds like you have it all worked out. I would suggest taking it easy on here before you have an aneurysm, humanity will be needing that big 'researching' brain of yours to save the world from its eventual demise.
and as usual your normal standard of ignoramus reply once again. Your family must surely love the intelligent conversational skills you bring to the table.
Bit lIke playing chess with a pigeon really isn't it? Regardless of the facts you're incapable of doing anything but just sh*tt*ng everywhere, but the will strut around as if you've won.
Bravo you. Bravely facing the world and having no shame in your obvious intellectual challenges.
'Independent' in the same vein that ISA websites or bank aligned planners have used that misnomer in the past you mean?
Pathetic attempt again to deflect from the reality that the ISA funds were not properly investigated at all. And you seem terrified I am calling BS on this? Some conflict yourself perhaps? I am not pro bank (both sides have been proven to be morally corrupt without exception) but I am utterly contemptuous that this joke RC hasn't had the brains or balls to at least look at ALL corruption or issues that affect Australians future retirement savings.
I am sure the blindly imbecilic Bernie Maddoff zealots believed his system was unquestionably infallible, akin to your own zombie alliance to ISA, What is wrong with simply wanting surety that another potentially misleading financial atrocity isn't occurring with our citizens retirement wealth?
Or are you trying to say that it is not worth investigating properly the apodictic facts of misleading asset allocations, conflicts of interests with every stage of the ISA process including building construction at grossly over inflated prices to union run labour forces with false 'valuations' used on balance sheets of fund assets, undisclosed insurance comms & reducing member benefits without informing members, millions per annum in undisclosed 'fees' out of the funds, cronyism with union reps and even Shortmens missus getting top gig, blatant breaches of sole interests, identified 'fee for no service' issues conveniently not questioned, underhand payments to unions, the highest paid board members in Oz all ISA funds yet the lowest qualified according to APRA's latest study, reported (but of course ASIC chose not to pursue and investigation) cases of major client losses on roll-over after woeful 'advice' from ISA aligned planners and worse still untrained 'call centre telemarketer operators' that make the Henderson case look like a child's sandbox argument.
But of course ASIC and now these clowns in the RC chose not even to question any of this to any degree.
What is wrong with expecting that all these issues are to have the light properly shone on them and be sorted out for once and for all? Or for that matter, that there are clear unequivocal equal guidelines put in place for all super boards, trustees, organisations and reporting requirements?
And let's not forget, some of the crap the RC did dredge up against every other institution bar the ISA were for events that occurred over 12 years ago - but of course ISA would have no skeletons in their cupboard of course?
If there is nothing to hide as you seem to be gullible or simple minded enough to believe, then a robust vigorous line of questioning (without the shit and giggle pathetic attempt that these mewling turds conducted), would be even better for your red flag cause, correct?
Or are you the fool saying those established facts are the fake news/conspiracy theory? I eagerly await your factual based reply vindicating beyond question the utter purity of ISA, or perhaps proof that the earth is indeed, flat.
Mr. Anon2, what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Ah Uni level Humanities debating tactics BigTinea. You forgot to tell him "and nobody likes you anyway. Nyah Nyah na Nyah Nyah."
Bigdoh address the issues he clearly identified rather than act infantile. Grow up or go away.
He is paid to be here, he is not going anywhere.
Yep, don’t like the score anon2? That’s Ok, blame the umpire, ignore the facts and evidence and chuck your toys out of your cot.
Fox and henhouse should now become a free to air, regularly played, community announcement - it was spot on. God’s speed to Mr Haine and his counsel’s assisting in making the obvious and urgent recommendation that banks be banned from running Australians super and ALL commissions go. And then give them all AOs for services to the community.
I see the red flags have arrived to the Royal Circus fan club. Good on you for not being embarrassed about your ignorance or lack of intelligence. Obviously ISA is an equal opportunity employer at all levels of operation.
I bet you looooooved that ad because it had toons right? the nice pictures made it easy for you to follow their version of fact? :) You guys crack me up with your whiney little ignorant speeches.
I sure did! Millions in taxpayers money could have been saved in just playing that one 30sec ad on day one of the RC. So, let’s just compare the pair, banks and other profiteering dens of shisters found by an ex high court judge and the best QCs in the land to be likely up for criminal behaviour versus, oh wait a minute, is that correct, oh it is, NO adverse finding against ANY industry funds. Well I’ll be!
Game over. You lose, sorry (not).
"Shysters". If you're going to ramble incoherent bs, please at least learn to spell rather than display your multitudinous layers of ignorance. Clarity of thought nor logic were strong suits of yours obviously.
Is it community standard or in the member's interest to spend millions of dollars each year preaching the propaganda against Banks and retail funds and paying for ground and TV rights to promote themselves. What return to members was provided by these costs. I have no love lost to the Banks and can tell you that my non-industry fund does perform better than the so called masters of the universe. Happy to pay a fee for this excess return. But, I do get service for what I pay and my adviser is available. Not sure what industry fund members get for their money and I am sure their will be no fines for the conflicted dealings and lack of disclosures and transparency in their funds
The banks are big enough to look after themselves, and are essential to our economy. There will be an election within 6 months. So the real issue is not industry fund issues, or whatever. The real issue is how will financial planning companies be hit by this RC and a change of government?
This article displays a perfectly balanced view of the 233 page long Round 5 closing submissions. It's quite reasonable to shine a light on the RC's failure to find anything untoward in industry fund's evil advertising and frankly dandy to completely gloss over the NAB's attempted opt-in approach to slashing the remediation bill for 100,000 affected members, or the CBA's repeatedly breaching the ban on accepting default contributions into non-MySuper accounts.
The cultural marxists at ISA need to realise that just because they perform miles better on just about every measure, they simply can't get away with this sort of monstrous conduct.
But they dont perform better once you actually compare their funds to others with the same level of growth assets.
They dont actually 'compare the pair'
Go and compare HostPlus "balanced" to other funds with 90% growth assets. The performance is suddenly on par at best.
Its going to take a big market sell off for people to realise how risky labeling high growth funds as 'balanced' really is... Risk adjusted returns are paramount, not headline returns.
Not if they're cooking the valuations.
Wow shoot me now if you operate at ANY level within our profession, I can't believe even a lowly ISA planner (aka soul selling scum) would be that blind or inept
You are all wrong
It is well known if you want professional independent advice you see a bank financial planner.
Independents will say anything and sell their own mother to make a dollar
Industry super funds are corrupt and wasteful of members funds with wasteful spending on sponsorships and entertainment and donations to unions and the labour party with insurance options that leave their members and their families destitute in the event of an insurable event.
Compare the pair
Two people
One with industry super fund
Group salary continuance coverage but fund changed providers and now member has no cover
member has a stroke and is disabled
Goes to claim on group salary continuance insurance with super fund. Claim is denied as member does not have insurance coverage due to changes caused by change of insurance provider member and family receives nothing and is forced to sell assets and live in the street as they have no funds
The other member sees a bank financial planner
Has group salary continuance cover put in place
Suffers stroke. Family contacts adviser. Adviser assists member and family in claim process and obtains claim proceeds from insurer
Member and family have funds and are able to relax and focus on recovery with no financial worries
What a difference
Industry funds are deceptive and self serving and should be exposed for what they are LIARS and THIEVES!!!!
Stop stealing from your members and providing useless insurances
The only real choice is a bank financial planner
And for those whom label fellow colleagues as scum this reflects your primitive intelligence ( got your financial qualifications doing a 2 week course at Kaplan and using airtasker to do all your assignments ) and your unprofessional conduct I look forward to when an audit is conducted on your cookie cutter, cut and paste advice documents devoid of any logical rationale but in your own self interest being exposed as the frauds you are and banned from the financial planning industry. You could not even get a bank planner job interview but gain entry through connections and pity rather then on merit
I look forward to reading on ASIC website your banned status. There is good news for you though an Anne likes to call people scum on her posts here in money management. You should both hook up and the money you save on eharmony start an investment and see the wonder of compound interest
See bank planners can even help you
This is general advice and does not take into consideration your needs and circumstances and may be unsuitable. Please see a bank planner for financial advice
Love it
ISA funds have been lightly let off. While not Ponzi schemes they take maximum advantage of the opacity of valuation and transactions in unlisted assets; particularly those purchased through related party interposed vehicles. If the music stops tomorrow, ie contributions dry up, many isa funds will be caught with their pants down.
Further, their fees disclosure is a joke. How can Hostplus truthfully claim to have the same low admin fee for more than 12 years. Really inflation doesn’t affect them, putting aside everything else? The real truth is that they lie about the level of admin fees by using accounting tricks. Look at their financial statement. And it’s not just gostplus, many other isa funds do it.
AND wtf happened to RG97? isa killed it off with its friends in the right places.
That’s just three examples where the rc can start looking.
Geez, these conspiracy theories are getting more hysterical and desparate. Put your theories to the test. Public submissions to the RC still open. Oh, hang on, that would mean both outing yourself and being a laughing stock. As they say, put up or shut up.
Hilarious that despite a multitude of facts being provided you label them, 'conspiracy theories'. All corrupt regimes use that approach you realise, Deny and then aim to discredit to avoid scrutiny. The next trick is the ISA propaganda is the 'moral high ground' mixed with a touch of political correctness thrown in... go away, clearly you don't belong in this arena or forum as there is nothing but an intellectual void wherever you express an opinion.
Thanks, but nah, having way too much fun to do that. and as my clients are happily reaping the benefit of having taken my advice as to where their super should be, I’ve currently got nothing better to do.
Is that all you did "advice as to where their super should be"? Tell me, is this a guess who you are thing? I'll start. You work for an Industry Fund and can be found living it up at the Tennis? You specialise in product flogging.
Super is but one part of planning overall, anyone working for a fund is kidding themselves if they say they are financial planners. Like the direct share salespeople calling themselves stockbrokers. Just little fish selling the souls to their masters and being paid not to advise but to retain, its not advice, its just general information facilitated by cross subsidising admin fees.
Haha, keep guessing ladies
Add new comment