• subs-bellGet the latest news! Subscribe to the ifa bulletin

FSC seeks 'urgent hearing' in MySuper row

The Financial Services Council has ignored Industry Super Australia’s plea to rule out legal action in the dispute over the selection process for default workplace super funds.

In a statement issued yesterday, the FSC announced it has requested a hearing before the Fair Work Commission, prior to the deadline for MySuper applications on 28 April, in order to challenge the “validity of the expert panel’s constitution and its ability to proceed with the review of default superannuation funds in modern awards”.

“The FSC is calling on the Fair Work Commission to allow us to make submissions on the current constitution of the expert panel which selects MySuper funds eligible for awards,” said FSC chief executive John Brogden.

“The extraordinary move by the Fair Work Commission president to appoint himself to the expert panel is not enough to remedy this issue.

“The expert panel must be validly reconstituted before the process can proceed. The process is fast losing the confidence of the industry and must be urgently remedied.”

While not singling out the FSC directly, Industry Super Australia also issued a statement yesterday, urging the “major banks” – which are represented by the FSC – to “rule out threatened legal action”.

ISA chief executive David Whiteley said that if opposition to the “legislated merit-based assessment of funds” was successful in preventing the current proposed system from going ahead it could “leave members worse off”.


“Seeking to halt a merit-based assessment of default super products follows on from the banks’ failed efforts to wind back financial advice laws and bring back sales commissions,” Mr Whiteley said.

“A merit-based quality filter that prioritises long-term investment performance is a necessity for Australia's compulsory super system.

“The major banks should re-think their approach to super, and seek to work with the super industry to establish a consensus on designing regulatory settings in the best interests of Australians who do not choose their own fund and who need financial advice.”

Which lobby group is right? Have your say below