SuperStream super crazy

It seems that contributors will send their data set to the adminstrator indepedent of the payment itself; the payment messages available cannot carry the required data set so we will have data going one way and the payment itself another. They will, of course, be re-united by the adminstrator and the system will be significantly improved. But it is a shame that the payment message itself cannot carry the standard data set, thereby providing a perfect solution. As for a platform on which to exchange the data - the ATO is not going to provide one. That's down to the incumbent technology providers. Because the payment isn't linked, the only real change for the incumbents will be a standard rich message to deal with and that should be relatively simple to accomodate. Whilst the UK led the way on Faster Payments, the pension contributions area is one where we are lagging well behind our Australian cousins. No standards. No platform. Contributions errors are made, investment of funds is delayed as much as a year whilst the administrator works out who paid what. As an employer making the contributions - it's a bit of a shambles over here. We watch the Superstream project with interest. Bring on the payment message that can carry the data.

Terrific article Alex. I don't know whether to laugh or cry. It's just a joke to see this unfolding and yet we are all impotent to change it.

I say bring Super Stream on. Under the current system members and employers are at the mercy of whatever rules a fund wants to impose of them making the industry a horror to deal with. Transferring a benefit from one fund to another should be an easy process, but funds will jump on any technicality to delay or avoid paying the benefit.

Certified ID requirements are a joke when professions such as pharmacists can't certify for superannuation purposes but can witness statutory declarations and the like. Trying to provide acceptable proof of identity to transfer benefits when you've recently moved is a nightmare, but it's common for people to move when they get a new job, especially where that job is in a different geographical area. It's no wonder members get confused and frustrated and fail to follow through and the lost super accounts grow.

As for employers, Fund A won't accept cheques, Fund B will only accept cheques. Some make you sign up as a registered employer before they will accept contributions. When you're dealing even 10 different funds with 10 different processes it's time consuming to get it all right. New employees also cause problems when they don't return choice forms on time so the employer processes to the default fund then has to change this when the employee makes a decision.

Super Stream is designed to standardise all of this making it easier to deal with the industry. If you think Super Stream is a joke, then all I can think of is that you don't deal with the every day frustrations or processing of transactions where members have given clear instructions or you like being able to delay the process to hold on to benefits as long as possible.

@Jennifer, yes I have had to deal with different funds and still think Super Stream is a joke.

This is what should have been done. Legislate that all retail funds accept BPay payments with a member number as reference. It's that easy.

Zero cost to the taxpayer. Easy to understand. Easy to implement in payment systems.