The government is rushing one banking royal commission recommendation through parliament. But is it intended to harm industry super funds?
In the aftermath of the banking royal commission, should we have a royal commission into Australia’s $24 billion-a-year gambling industry?
While we're focused on what to do about under-performing superannuation funds, there's also the question of compensation for the egregious behaviour of financial institutions.
Crikey readers respond to independent Susan Moylan-Coombs' run at Tony Abbott's seat of Warringah.
In concentrating on underperformance, we're in danger of missing another big superannuation rort: high fees charged by fund managers.
Based on its recent performance under Peter Costello, the Future Fund shouldn't be allowed anywhere near super. So why is a publication controlled by Peter Costello's company spruiking the idea?
Good morning, early birds. PM Scott Morrison has announced a plan to reduce Australia’s migration cap, China has been revealed as the perpetrator of a number of cyber thefts in Australia, and a new scheme will give domestic violence victims early access to their super. It’s the news you need to know, with Chris Woods.
After publicly confirming the massive underperformance of retail super funds, the Liberals then unwittingly set the scene for an exposure of the rorts that riddled the sector — all in the name of attacking industry super funds.
This is the house of financial regulation that Peter built, and it's collapsing at the royal commission he said wasn't needed.
Events of the last week show why the banking royal commission needs to be extended until the superannuation sector is cleaned up.