This inquiry aligns with previous concerns raised by superannuation advocacy groups, such as the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA), which suggested APRA should possess a "quasi right of veto." Both accounting organizations agree that the fitness and propriety of potential board members need reinforcing, although they express substantial reservations.
CPA Australia and CA-ANZ recommend that any involvement by APRA in the board appointment process should remain advisory and non-binding. They suggest that more specifics are needed, especially regarding how APRA might engage in candidate evaluations, such as interviews, and cite an interest in APRA's past usage of similar processes to alleviate apprehension.
In their feedback on APRA's Governance Review Discussion Paper, the accounting groups supported the introduction of a lifelong default tenure limit for non-executive directors. They also advised that APRA consider board members' cognitive capabilities as part of their fitness assessments, emphasising that tenure restrictions alone may not be sufficient to manage age-related cognitive decline.
Additionally, they advocated for clarity regarding the calculation of tenure post-merger to prevent artificial resets, highlighting the need to keep tenure measures effective and fair amid fund consolidations.
The discourse surrounding APRA's proposed governance changes continues to evolve, as various industry bodies voice their views on balancing regulatory oversight with organisational autonomy.
