It's pretty clear Superannuation and Corporate Law Minister Nick Sherry is keen to overhaul the superannuation system.
In fact, Sherry has been heard likening the process to a house renovation. But as we all know, a do-it-yourself renovation does not always run smoothly.
While the recent announcement by Sherry of a review of Australia's superannuation system was backed by many of the industry's peak bodies, including the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia and the Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees, not everyone is convinced another review is what is needed.
Opposition financial services, superannuation and corporate law spokesman Chris Pearce was quick to hit back at the proposal.
"Rather than working to establish certainty for all Australians, the government has yet again begun a process of destabilising super and reducing the incentive for Australians to contribute," Pearce said.
When questioned by Investor Weekly, Pearce was unable to explain how such a review would destabilise the super system, however, he did point out the number of reviews could be confusing for everyday Australians.
"This review further adds to the current reviews into self-managed super funds, simple advice in superannuation, a central clearing house, lost accounts, tax relief of merging funds and indexation of government superannuation schemes," he said.
While it is true the super system is being examined through a number of reviews, such as the Henry tax review and the Harmer pensions review, it would seem that after 20 years an examination of the regime is justifiable.
While Sherry points out that for the most part the system is strong and well regulated, media reports have focused on some areas that are ripe for consideration.
The question of fees and commissions has been thrust into the spotlight, particularly with the FPA's proposal last week to phase out commissions in favour of a fee-for-service remuneration model by 2012.
Sherry also said "current operational features" of the system should be examined.
While the industry awaits the 'big reveal', that is, the release of the review's terms of reference and details of its structure, perhaps it is a good time for the industry to start focusing on how it wants the renovation to take place and what it wants the 'house' to look like over the next 20 years and beyond.
