Australia’s welding industry has accused the Reserve Bank of making it harder for manufacturers to lift productivity, arguing higher interest rates are strangling investment in the technology and training needed to improve it.
The latest corporate tax data released today by the Australian Tax Office (ATO) showed that once again, major gas producers are paying no company tax, and despite claims that changes to the Petroleum Rent Resources Tax (PRRT) would deliver “more revenue sooner”, the PRRT in 2024-25 raised less tax than in 2020-21.
Domestic data does not support the decision to raise interest rates. Being wrong in the right company (the market and conservative economists) might make for easier dinner parties and congratulatory op-eds in the financial pages, but it does nothing to look after the welfare – economic and otherwise – of the Australian people.
Inflation in August rose from 3.5% to 4.0%, which might make you think the RBA had a point in raising interest rates yesterday. The problem is that all of the increase was due to petrol prices.
Australians invest more than $4.5 trillion in superannuation each year, yet many are unaware that they are funding military violence. This includes tertiary education workers whose default fund, UniSuper, invests heavily in companies responsible for the suffering of millions of people, including in Palestine.
While some funds have recently divested from Israeli banks and bonds, weapons manufacturers, and companies complicit in the illegal occupation of Palestine, UniSuper has increased many such holdings. Holdings in Elbit Systems are now 9 times higher than in December 2023, for example, Elbit being one of the major suppliers of weapons used against Palestinians in the ongoing genocide in Gaza.
UniSuper has also substantially increased its investment in other companies that – according to the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Quaker organisation American Friends Service Committee – supply weapons or logistical support for occupation and genocide, including Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems, Palantir, and RTX Corporation (formerly called Raytheon).
Such investments are unethical, but they’re also financially and legally risky. A 2025 UN report states that where corporations continue activities and relationships with Israel, they may be found to have knowingly contributed to violations of Palestinians’ rights, and crimes of apartheid and genocide. It cautioned that “both criminal and civil laws in various jurisdictions can be invoked to hold corporate entities or their executives accountable for violations of human rights and/or crimes under international law”.
Under Australian law, superannuation funds must disclose their portfolio holdings twice every year. But funds are not required to provide plain language explanations, or to ensure that public data can be easily searched. Nor are they required to maintain the public listing of historical holdings. This can make it difficult for non-experts to understand available data and track changes, leaving members unsure of how and where their money is really invested.
But super fund members are interested in where their money goes.
A recent survey found that over half of Australians would pay closer attention to their superannuation if the “environmental and/or social impact of their investments” was reported. Another survey found that four in five Australians expect their superannuation to be managed ethically, with seven in ten being prepared to switch funds or options to match their values.
UniSuper’s response to concerns about its investments has been to promote their Sustainable Balanced, Sustainable High Growth, and Global Environmental Opportunities options. These options screen out companies with more than 5% revenue from weapons.
But these options are not the default and are far less significant: for every $1 of investment items in these three Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) options, $6 is invested in UniSuper’s other options combined.
What’s more, recent ASIC enforcement actions against misleading ESG and sustainability claims demonstrate that ethical investment labels do not always reflect underlying investments.
Quality research, analysis, explainers and factchecks from experts you can trust.
Besides, contributing to an “ethical” branch of a fund that is otherwise committed to investment in militarism keeps money captive in a destructive system and fails to incentivise the fund to become more ethical.
When it comes to their investments in militarism and weapons, superannuation funds regularly engage in ESG-washing. That includes misrepresenting the degree to which they are complicit in human rights abuses – a practice sometimes referred to as “blue-washing”.
Broad claims made on UniSuper’s website suggest the fund makes ethical investments. For example, UniSuper’s webpage on “Supporting a better tomorrow” lists environment and human rights in an infographic, stating that “For us, ESG is about investing in quality companies with good environmental, social and governance practices”.
This disconnect between UniSuper’s public commitment to ethical investment and its involvement in the military-industrial complex highlights a significant concern for those dedicated to teaching and researching for a better future. The fund’s status as the default option for the higher education sector warrants reconsideration.
Clear opposition to military violence has been consistently voiced by education communities, including through votes at major universities and in a recent open letter calling for an end to complicity in the scholasticide occurring in Palestine. There are now multiple other super funds arguably better aligned with the values of these UniSuper members.
This deplorable situation highlights many serious problems: a lack of access to clear information, the unregulated use of terms, window-dressing ESG options, and university Enterprise Bargaining Agreements that ‘set and forget’ UniSuper as the sector’s default fund.
Superannuation funds make decisions that support and profit from militarised violence. So while the system funnels billions of dollars to companies directly involved in militarism and genocide, there is little hope of a future worth retiring into.
The enormous wealth of our superannuation system should require funds to do much, much better – for humanity, and our shared future.
Rachel Hughes, Alicia Coram, Fia Hamid-Walker, Kathryn Ticehurst and Alison Gibberd for the UniSuper: Divest from Death campaign
