Lisa Darmanin (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I want to take note of the predictable and repeated attacks on industry superannuation that were debated earlier today. The $3.9 trillion superannuation industry in this country is something that we should be proud of. It belongs to the workers of this country—we need to remember that. The vast pool of funds represents the hard-earned wages of Australians, set aside for them to retire with dignity and security. Time and time again, we come in here and we hear the system that is the envy of the world being run down by those opposite. What I'd really love to see in this place is a stop to the politicising of superannuation by those opposite, which comes from their ideological opposition to workers being involved in governing their own retirement savings.

Superannuation, as we know it today, was born out of visionary Labor leadership. It was in the final budget of the Hawke government in 1991 that universal compulsory superannuation was first announced, and it was the Keating government, in 1992, that brought it into law. That's in our lifetime. It wasn't just policy; it was a bold and visionary step in securing the future of every working Australian. And it has delivered. It's about addressing the looming intergenerational challenges of an ageing population, and it is also about fairness—about ensuring that, regardless of your income, your profession or your background, you could build a nest egg for your retirement. Prior to 1985, which is not too long ago, Australia relied only on the taxpayer-provided age pension as the principal post-employment income system. This system, as I said, is the envy of the world. It should not be politicised; rather, it should be supported by all of us.

I'll now turn to the specific debate that was raised by Senator Bragg earlier today. As Senator Gallagher said, the Albanese government expects all superannuation funds to meet the highest standards of governance and to act in the best financial interests of its members. The law requires this, and the independent regulators, APRA and ASIC, have the mandate to uphold these standards. I know this firsthand. I had the privilege of being on the board of a superannuation fund. I was actually the chair of a superannuation fund. I know firsthand the supervision that is applied to funds by APRA and ASIC, the regulators. In my own experience, I met with APRA a number of times, as chair of that superannuation fund, as part of their regular supervision regime.

Labor is committed to delivering accountability, transparency and good governance in every part of our financial system, and we have a very strong record of transparency. We have legislated to align financial reporting requirements by funds with those of public companies. We have expanded the coverage of superannuation performance tests, from around 70 products to more than 600. We have supported APRA's work to expand transparency of superannuation fund expenditure, with its latest release.

The part of superannuation that I think those opposite find most offensive is that it is a partnership between employers and employees, with workers and their employers working together to deliver retirement savings. This working together includes marketing through employer organisations and employee organisations. Often these arrangements are more cost-effective than doing so through other means. In fact, at the October 2023 Senate estimates, Margaret Cole, the Deputy Chair of APRA, said, in relation to some of these marketing arrangements:

… there are many in the super industry who make payments to related parties, and that can include trade unions, that are for perfectly proper purposes and which would appear on the face of it to be value for money and appropriate.

…   …   …

… super funds require services. They may contract with trade unions and others—

including employer organisations—

to provide those services …

As long as it is in the best financial interests of their members, then it is appropriate.