Jane Hume (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on this urgency motion, which calls on this chamber to reaffirm the importance of accountability and transparency in Australia's superannuation system. It is so disappointing that we have to have a debate like this, on a motion like this, in this very chamber, whose primary role is scrutiny, whose primary role is to shine a light in dark corners. You would think—indeed, the Australian people would expect—that this chamber, no matter which party you are from, would support accountability and transparency in Australia's superannuation system. But no—clearly, no. After all, the trustees that operate within Australia's superannuation system are the custodians of $3.4 trillion of Australia's retirement savings. Let me put that into context for you: $3.4 trillion is twice the size of the ASX. It's 1½ times the size of Australia's GDP. It is an enormous amount of money, and yet we allow these enormous companies—these huge, huge organisations—to operate in the dark.

Unfortunately, this is not a view that's shared by everyone in the chamber. We in the coalition have always supported transparency and accountability in the superannuation sector because we know that it will deliver choice and better outcomes for Australians if we do. That's why, when we were in government, we implemented a series of reforms that modernised the superannuation system, addressing the two key drivers of poorer outcomes for superannuation members: opacity and underperformance. Our reforms, through the Protecting Your Super legislation, choice legislation and Your Future, Your Super legislation, were designed specifically to improve transparency and to allow for better informed choices and greater retirement outcomes for Australians. And it is working.

The Your Future, Your Super reforms were the most significant since the introduction of compulsory super back in 1992, consolidating 3.5 million unintended multiple accounts, which were an intentional design feature of the system so that you paid twice as much in fees, twice as much for administration. It was an intentional design feature. Well, they have diminished dramatically; 3.5 million unintended multiple accounts have now exited the system, making you more money. We banned exit fees, we capped fees on small balances, and we ensured that younger people do not have to pay for insurances that they do not need.

We also provided Australian workers with a genuine choice—a real choice. You didn't have to be told by your employer which fund you had to go into. You didn't have to be told by your union. For the first time, you got to choose which superannuation fund best suited you, your family and your lifestyle. These measures stopped superannuation balances being eroded by unnecessarily and overly high fees, which, over time, will save people—particularly young people now—who have combined their accounts tens of thousands of dollars, which will be compounded into hundreds of thousands in their retirement. Following this, the Your Future, Your Super reforms will save all workers around $17.9 billion over the next 10 years by putting increasing downward pressure on fees, removing unnecessary waste and, most importantly, increasing the accountability and transparency of all superannuation funds.

Unfortunately, the Labor Party and the Greens fought us every step of the way on all of this legislation. They were desperate to keep their mates in the industry—and particularly in the unions—happy at all costs. That's at the costs of super fund members—at the cost of you. One key element of our reforms was to ensure that super funds had to act in the best financial interests of members—not the best interests, because that morphed. All of a sudden, it was in the best interests of members to drive across great bridges or to invest in housing developments in London! No, the best financial interests of members should be the primary purpose of superannuation funds.

Unfortunately, those opposite prioritise mates instead of ensuring accountability and transparency for all Australian superannuants. That's why it wasn't surprising, although it was extraordinarily galling and extraordinarily brazen, that the first thing Stephen Jones, the Assistant Treasurer, did in the other place upon coming to government—the very first thing; the number one priority in the Treasury portfolio of a brand-new government—was to wind back transparency and accountability in superannuation. You would think that, after nine years in opposition, you would have had a little bit more to do once you hit the Treasury benches. But, no, that's what Labor have prioritised. That was their first order of business. It's shameful, it's brazen and it's after all the good work was done. I will agree with Senator Walsh: yes, superannuation was certainly the invention of a Labor government, but by god it took a coalition government to make it work for members rather than making it work for the funds and fund managers.

The Assistant Treasurer has quickly followed up with a review of the Your Future, Your Super laws, the laws that improved member outcomes, that improved performance, that improved transparency and that got rid of the underperforming funds. Now there's a review going on—a secret review, I hear. We don't even know who's on this secret review, but I reckon that we can guess. Under the former government's accountability and transparency reforms, super funds were required to disclose, line by line, their expenditure on things like political donations, marketing and whether they sponsor football stadiums or football teams. They were required to disclose payments to industry bodies, including unions. They were required to disclose inter-related party transactions, this mysterious, amorphous blob. They were required to disclose exactly what that meant. That's what the Assistant Treasurer has decided to unwind.

Why is this outrageous? Because superannuation funds are trusts. Every single dollar that a superannuation fund has belongs to a member. It doesn't belong to a big corporate entity. It's not as if they can borrow it. It's your money, and they won't tell you how they're spending it. For every dollar that they spend, that's one dollar that's gone from your retirement savings. Don't you think that you deserve to know where every dollar of your retirement savings is being spent? That's all we ask. Yet the first order of business for the Assistant Treasurer, Stephen Jones, is to unwind these reforms.

I'm very disappointed in the Greens. It appears that the self-appointed arbiters of transparency in this place, the Australian Greens, are backing the Labor Party. Senator McKim has actually said out loud in this place that the Greens want meaningful transparency that tracks the flow of members' money. Well, the fastest way to do this, Senator McKim, is to commit to supporting the disallowance of the government's watered-down regulations. But he refuses to do that. Senator McKim talks about working with the government to improve accountability, while at the same time maintaining that the Australian Greens will not commit to supporting a motion on the Notice Paper this week to disallow a repeal of these watered-down measures.

Senator McKim thinks that the government, which has already put its flag well in the sand on this issue and moved to repeal these transparency measures, will suddenly change its tune when the only mechanism in parliament that it has to stop it evaporates. I wish that I had Senator McKim's optimism. In fact, I think that's probably the wrong word. I thought that perhaps it was naivete, but I think when we heard from Senator McKim before we realised he's just as captured as those opposite. What a terrible shame for a party that prides itself on its ethical behaviour, its accountability, its transparency and its mission for integrity. What a shame, Senator McKim.

I do suspect that the Greens will support this motion. I suspect that they will claim that they do support accountability and that they do support transparency in super in order to deliver those better outcomes, but the proof of the pudding is always going to be in the eating. Put your money where your mouth is, Senator McKim. The proof will be how they vote when they get a chance to actually ensure transparency rather than just talk about it. They will have a chance to ensure transparency in super is maintained or removed. I call on the Australian Greens right now to walk this talk. First support the motion, but then commit to supporting the disallowance motion on the Notice Paper. But not only that; commit to supporting it today. Commit to supporting it this week. Your reputations depend on it.