A Social Finance Taskforce for Australia
The social economy sector has grown rapidly over the past decade. There
are approximately 600 000 social economy organisations in Australia, of
which around 59 000 are economically significant. As reported in January
2010, the sector makes up just over four per cent of GDP (around $43 billion)
and has close to five million volunteers contributing $14.6 billion in
The sector is diverse, comprising small, medium and large enterprises residing
in both the for-profit and not for profit (NFP) sectors. And there is no single
legal entity that applies to social economy organisations. Often, they will enlist
hybrid models to achieve their social objectives.
A strong and vibrant social economy sector depends on offering a wide variety
of financial options to the full spectrum of social economy organisations. These
options are important if social economy organisations are to diversify their
This inquiry has collected considerable evidence concerning deficiencies
in the ability of social economy organisations to access mainstream capital,
particularly non-grant and non-gift capital.
Some of these deficiencies relate to the shortcomings of the social economy
they lack a steady revenue stream to attract investment;
they lack the collateral required to guarantee loans;
there are limited organisational structures that are suitable for
social organisations to raise equity capital;
they are generally accustomed to a culture that is reliant on
grant capital and are often risk averse to debt and equity capital;
they often lack the capacity to manage new forms of capital; and
small and medium sized social economy organisations often have difficulty
accessing start-up capital and finance to invest in new capacity.
Other aspects of social economy organisations' difficulties in
attracting mainstream capital reflect deficiencies in mainstream financial
the majority of these institutions have limited understanding of
the capital needs of social economy organisations; and
the current range of financial products that they offer carry large
transaction costs relative to the capital required by social economy organisations.
In addition, there are a limited number of specialist intermediaries to
build a support framework for the sector and connect commercial finance
institutes with social organisations. And finally, there are specific
challenges for government:
the sector needs a measurement framework to provide consistent
terminology and metrics to enhance transparency and reporting for social
organisations and to build investors' confidence; and
during a time of rapid international developments in the social
economy landscape, there is limited awareness of emerging finance options among
social organisations and investors in Australia.
This report examines each of these challenges and explores the options
to address them. In broad terms, the solutions will require:
structuring traditional forms of grant capital to direct funds
towards infrastructure costs and capacity building, to attract additional
investors and to encourage collaboration amongst stakeholders in the sector;
strengthening specialist intermediaries that cultivate
'investment ready' social organisations and connect them with mainstream
financial institutions and a range of suitable financial products such as debt
and equity capital;
building a new asset class—social impact investment—which blends
social and financial returns to engage with a broader spectrum of investors,
including institutional investors such as superannuation funds;
supplying adequate seed capital to foster innovation in the
sector by developing viable social enterprises; and
a crucial role for government to implement legislative reforms
and tax incentives designed to attract further investment to the sector.
In the committee's view, this represents a significant program of action
for the social economy sector, mainstream financial institutions, existing and
prospective financial intermediaries and government. Crucially, there is a need
to coordinate these efforts among these four groups. If opportunities to
finance the social economy sector are to be realised, they need to be planned
and publicised. It is in this context that the convening power of government is
The committee also believes that, the task of matching the complex and
disparate financing needs of the sector with the emerging financing options
requires direction and advice from a body with expertise in both the social and
financial sectors. It is the view of the committee that this oversight is best
suited to an expert taskforce that is facilitated by government.
The idea of a high level taskforce to assist in the development of a
social economy capital market is not new. The United Kingdom and Canada have
both implemented successful social finance taskforces (see below). In the
Australian context, the recent Productivity Commission (PC) report, Contribution
of the Not-for-Profit Sector, recommended that an advisory panel be established
to provide options for the development of a sustainable market of debt products
for the sector.
The need for a Social Finance Taskforce
The principal benefit of a Social Finance Taskforce is to provide
strategic policy direction to raise awareness of finance and investment
opportunities in the social economy and to encourage collaboration in the
sector. The social economy sector in Australia is currently at a stage where
there is a need for this direction, awareness and collaboration.
In their joint submission to this inquiry, the Department of Education,
Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR) and the Department of the Prime
Minister and Cabinet (PM&C) highlighted the work of the Monitor Institute
in the United States, which developed a framework outlining the stages of
development for a social impact investment market (see Diagram 2.1).
Diagram 2.1: Phases of development in a social impact
Monitor Institute 2009, as cited
in Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations and Department
of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Submission 9, p. xi.
The Monitor Institute characterised the essential activities necessary
for the marketplace building stage under three broad categories:
building efficient intermediation in the market;
building enabling infrastructure for the industry; and
developing the absorptive capacity of social organisations
seeking investment capital.
The current stage of development for the social finance market in
Australia is best described as being at the 'uncoordinated innovation stage',
with some early marketplace building activities occurring.
There is a need for a coordinated approach across government, the social and
financial sectors in order to ensure that marketplace building occurs as
efficiently and effectively as possible.
Infrastructure needs to be developed to manage the sector's evolution
and to support it with sound institutional and regulatory arrangements.
Commonwealth, state and territory government agencies will need to prepare their
staff with skills and knowledge of the sector to progress the reforms.
Raising awareness of investment
opportunities in the social economy
The committee has received evidence that there is limited awareness of
financial options among social economy organisations, investors and the general
community. An awareness of these options is crucial. As one witness
I know you have talked about investment readiness, and I
think this is a really critical point, but it is almost as though there is a
step before that about investment awareness and understanding within
not-for-profits and the sector as a whole about the need for moving away from
funding as an all-consuming source of revenue and to include possibilities such
as debt and equity.
In this context, the committee also heard that the financial industry must
become more engaged with the social economy sector and the emerging
opportunities presented by social impact investment (see chapter 6). Mainstream
financial institutions often struggle to understand the unique nature of social
economy organisations when undertaking credit assessments.
The trustees of many philanthropic foundations are unaware of the opportunities
to make social investments with their corpus of funds.
Moreover, institutional investors are often wary about engaging with new
or unproven investment classes. The 'blended value' proposition offered by
social investment projects, offering both financial and social returns, is
difficult for some investors to understand:
With the notion that you are either investing or supporting,
it is really hard to get to the middle ground—'Am I investing or am I
supporting?' It is much easier for people conceptually to think it is either an
investment or it is supporting. My understanding from talking to people
involved in providing high-level financial advice to high-wealth individuals is
that many of them are confused by the notion of reduced return for social
benefit. They are happier to say, 'Let's just do a social benefit. What is the
return stuff about? That's just confusing.'
Mr Toby Hall, the Chief Executive Officer of Mission Australia, told the
committee that if social investment products are to be developed to leverage
finance from institutional investors, a forum that brings together the various
sectors involved is necessary:
In terms of unlocking superannuation funds there needs to be
some government interaction with the superannuation funds to look at how this
can happen. It is complicated and I understand where they are coming from.
However, I think it is something that is achievable. It is about having the
right instrument. That takes a partnership with the superannuation funds to
say, 'Can we work together to create the right instrument?' ...
I think there needs to be a round table with superannuation
funds, the major banks, some of the non-profits and the guys from Bendigo
[Bank] to actually nut through what the product looks like, what tax
requirement is needed and what risk model we are comfortable with. You are then
in a position to look at legislation to enable that.
Fundraising Institute Australia argued that the public, as major
contributors to the social economy, should be informed of the financial
innovation opportunities in the sector.
The Community Council of Australia (CCA) highlighted that while the Australian
community is actively engaged in the sector through receiving services,
volunteering and financial giving, most are not aware of the emerging financial
options available to support the sector:
...this is fundamentally an issue of awareness, knowledge,
having appropriate products available and having appropriate ways of engaging,
allocating, monitoring, and reporting on financial investment and other
products. There is clearly untapped potential here to influence the extent and
nature of giving if appropriate products can be developed.
Without appropriate brokerage and awareness campaigns, it is
difficult to see how demand for more innovative NFP investment and financing
options might become more accessible.
The Centre for Social Impact argued that government has a key role to
support initiatives to raise awareness of finance options among stakeholders.
Mr Paul Ronalds of PM&C elaborated on the need for government to
collaborate with a range of stakeholders to promote the growth of the sector
and address policy changes:
Responding to today's policy challenges can no longer just be
the role of government or even bureaucrats such as myself. This is particularly
the case in a constrained fiscal environment. Instead it must be much more of a
collaborative effort involving the public, private and not-for-profit sectors
working together to bring their respective strengths and resources to the
In this context, government must become much better at using
its convening power to catalyse, promote and to encourage the private and
not-for-profit sectors as well as individual citizens to become active agents
of a change that we would like to see in our society.
In the committee's view, a taskforce of talented and experienced people with
high-profile positions within banks, the superannuation sector, consulting
firms and the social economy sector could promote interest in, and galvanise
support for, a robust social capital market and emerging financial products and
The challenge of developing a social economy capital market is
fundamentally about communicating the benefits for stakeholders in becoming involved
and promoting partnerships. As the National Australia Bank (NAB) has argued:
If Australia is truly to build a robust not-for-profit
capital market we need to clearly articulate the benefit of such a market. This
will also require cross sector collaboration and commitments from diverse
Mr Ronalds of PM&C told the committee that the department is
considering collaboration, or co-creation, as a means of tackling social
Examples perhaps to draw to the committee's attention would
be more effective use of existing grant money—so going out with your tenders
and rather than perhaps saying, 'The government would like to have an
organisation do X for it', say, 'This is a social policy goal that the
government has. What organisations, for-profit and not-for-profit, are willing
to come together and co-create in relation to the sorts of things?' ... That is
a bit of a culture shift again for government. The whole notion round
co-creation of these sorts of things challenges some cultural settings in
government. It can raise issues around accountability and a whole range of
political issues and things like that. So we are having to work through all of
those in these sorts of trials.
The PC highlighted new configurations to raise finance for the sector.
Mr Robert Fitzgerald told the committee:
What we are starting to see around philanthropy—and you will
see this in Australia at the moment—is that a number of philanthropists are
saying, ‘We are prepared to put in $2 for the project provided government puts
in $1 and the not-for-profit organisation puts in X’, which might be in-kind or
other. Those sorts of arrangements are very exciting. Again, there is certainly
no reason why the government could not and should not look at the opportunities
to provide some sort of support.
A recent example of collaboration in the sector is the GoodStart
Consortium, comprised of four not-for-profits and the assistance of Social
Ventures Australia (SVA). The transaction included $15 million in government
support, $45 million in social finance and $120 million of debt from
the NAB. The capital was used to purchase 659 child care centres which are now
run with business disciplines for social purposes.
Joint ventures within the sector increase the ability to raise capital
for projects of significant scale. A number of submitters highlighted the trend
of cross-sector collaboration, and the advantages of pooling resources from the
public, philanthropic and corporate sectors. Finance, human capital, networks,
knowledge and expertise can be combined to maximise impact and cost-sharing
Christian Super argued that collaboration also encourages accountability between
organisations and acts to provide default diversification for investors.
The law firm Catherine Brown and Associates suggested that peak bodies in the
sector could be encouraged to facilitate national or state-wide purchasing
programs to enable a superior negotiating position for organisations sharing
similar needs and facing similar risks.
A key role of a Social Finance Taskforce should be to design and commend
collaborative projects between mainstream financial institutions, social
economy organisations and governments. The Taskforce should provide policy
advice to government on the most effective ways to encourage these stakeholders
to finance the social economy sector.
Social Finance Taskforces in the United Kingdom and Canada
Several witnesses to this inquiry drew the committee's attention to the important
role that social finance taskforces played in the UK and Canada to develop a
capital market for the social economy.
The UK Social Investment Task Force
The UK SITF was established at the request of Treasury in April 2000.
Its purpose was 'to set out how entrepreneurial practices could be applied to
obtain higher social and financial returns from social investment, to harness
new talents and skills, to address economic regeneration and to unleash new
sources of private and institutional investment'.
The first report of the SITF, Enterprising Communities: Wealth Beyond
Welfare, was published in October 2000 and was followed by two progress
reports published in 2003 and 2005. Thereafter, the taskforce met periodically
to monitor progress and consider ways to progress the social investment agenda.
A final report, Social Investment Ten Years On, reviewed the
achievements of the taskforce and considered further policy development.
A number of policy suggestions from the final report were included in the UK
Cabinet Office's Growing the Social Investment Market, which was
published in February 2011.
The initial report of the taskforce made five recommendations which were
all (at least partially) implemented, resulting in:
the introduction of Community Investment Tax Relief;
matching finance to help set up the first community development
venture capital fund;
additional disclosure by banks of their lending activities;
legislative and regulatory changes to provide greater latitude
and encouragement for charitable trusts and foundations to invest in community
development finance; and
the creation of the Community Development Finance Association
(CDFA), a trade association to provide support for community development finance
Sir Ronald Cohen, the Chair of the UK SITF, told the committee how the
SITF encouraged social investment:
...in the UK, this whole process started at the end of 2000,
when the Social Investment Task Force reported that, in addition to
philanthropy, there was the possibility of bringing in social investment to
play a major role in resolving social issues.
Basically, our capitalist systems deals brilliantly with its
business and financial consequences but does not really have a part of the
system that is powerful enough to deal with the social issues, and that between
the public sector and the private sector there is a very considerable social
sector, generally called the voluntary sector or the third sector. In the UK it
comprises about 100 billion pounds of foundation assets and 800,000 full-time
equivalents working in not-for-profit organisations. If one wants to focus on
developing the capability of the social sector to deal with social issues then
we need to create a system to support that role, and we need to innovate in
order to make it effective.
JBWere, a subsidiary of the National Australia Bank, noted that the UK SITF
assisted in efforts to avoid a disjointed and sporadic approach to reform and was
important to setting the agenda for impact investing.
The Canadian Taskforce on Social
The Canadian Task Force on Social Finance (TFSF) was conceived by Social
Innovation Generation, a social innovation think-tank, in partnership with the MaRS
Discovery District. The TFSF's charter was to alter the mindset about investing
and philanthropy in Canada. The TFSF report, Mobilizing Private Capital for
Public Good, was published in December 2010. It made seven recommendations including:
encouraging Canadian public and private foundations to invest at
least 10 per cent of their capital (totalling $34 billion) in mission-related
investments (MRI) by 2020, potentially unlocking $3.4 billion for social
establishing a federal partnership with private, institutional
and philanthropic investors to create the Canada Impact Investment Fund that
will support existing and new regional funds using a range of instruments
(debt, equity, quasi-equity); and
increasing the engagement of Canadian pension funds in impact
investing through clarification of fiduciary duty and annual disclosure of
impact investing allocations.
The work of the Canadian Taskforce has been well received, with members
of the investment and social enterprise sectors and government departments
expressing interest in advancing the taskforce's recommendations.
The committee was informed that a ministerial committee will examine the work
of the taskforce, headed by the Canadian Minister for human development and
human capital and the Deputy Minister for Finance.
The demand for a social finance taskforce in Australia
A number of submitters to the inquiry proposed that Australia should establish
a Social Finance Taskforce, similar to that in the UK and Canada.
Mr Michael Traill, Chief Executive Officer of SVA commended the work of the UK SITF,
and highlighted that the taskforce had been influential in the development of a
sophisticated and sustainable social capital market:
That [UK] task force in the late nineties was instrumental in
establishing it in a structured and coherent way with the best input from
heavyweight players from across the sectors driven by Sir Ron himself. It
created a structural and sustainable framework that means the UK is now quite a
sophisticated developed market. I think there is a bit of light on the hill
around some of the opportunities and lessons from the UK that we should think
about applying here.
My sense is, having observed the UK and having visited
there... the footprints from that, now 10 or 12 years down the track, are
everywhere. What it also galvanised was a level of interest in support for and
where it is back to: 'the war for talent'. Ron Cohen and others have made that
market interesting... This is drawing highly talented, experienced people out
of the top end investment banks and consulting firms, as well as experienced
people from the non-profit sector. So people arrive in that space thinking
about scale opportunities with access to capital... I think it is both a combination
of doing the homework and coming up with practical recommendations and also
being a bit of a magnet for talent in terms of drawing people into the idea
that they can be constructively involved.
The PC report has extensive commentary on deficiencies in the supply of
capital to the sector and observed many barriers and limitations within the
capital market for social economy organisations.
To address these deficiencies, the PC recommended that the government establish
an Advisory Panel to:
...consider options and assess progress in developing a
sustainable market for not-for-profit organisation debt products with the aim
of establishing mainstream financial products for investors who are willing to
accept a lower risk adjusted financial return for an accompanying social
In evidence to the committee, Mr Robert Fitzgerald, who chaired the PC
inquiry into the NFP sector, emphasised that an Advisory Panel was foundational
to the development of a capital market for social economy organisations. He particularly
emphasised the practical advice that such a Panel could provide to government
to advance a social investment agenda:
Senator MARK BISHOP: We are hearing different
approaches to solving this issue of appropriate products for social investment.
Who is best charged with doing that type of work?
Mr Fitzgerald: We saw that the first step in that was
this advisory panel by Treasury, which would bring together the various parties
and then, having identified the opportunities, work out a pathway by which you
could actually turn the opportunities into reality. I suppose that is the only
place we can start. This is why government is so essential. It can bring the
relevant parties together, identify the appropriate opportunities and then work
out those implementation pathways.
The PC report recommended that the Office for the Not-for-Profit Sector
should facilitate the establishment of an advisory panel.
However, the committee notes that the office is quite small, with only 12 staff
and that it has 'a far-reaching agenda'.
Foresters Community Finance (Foresters) suggested that a taskforce could
progress development of intermediaries in the industry, such as CDFIs, that bring
financing institutions and social economy organisations together:
One thing that would be great would be coordination across
various government agencies about the pursuit of this goal. This is where the
market and the industry look at something like a social investment task force.
Whether it is exactly that or not, it seems to make some sense because it would
create that forum in which various players could come together in one place and
have this kind of debate and discussion regularly, with a common set of goals
to be in pursuit of.
Ms Kylie Charlton, an expert in social finance, also called for a forum
similar to that of the UK and Canadian taskforces to coordinate the development
of the capital market in the social economy:
In both these jurisdictions the respective task forces were
instrumental in galvanizing stakeholders across the private, government and
non-profit sectors around a common vision and strategy for development of a
social capital market. While there is an increasing level of conversation in Australia
on the topic it is largely uncoordinated and needs to be structured to ensure
that we move forward in a considered manner that truly recognises success is
dependent on cross sectoral engagement.
The CCA roundtable
In response to this evidence, in September 2011, the CCA convened a
roundtable of 15 social finance experts including intermediaries,
financial institutions, philanthropists, foundations, government and NFPs. The
purpose was to discuss their shared priorities to develop a capital market for
the social economy.
The roundtable recommended that an expert taskforce be established to
shape a policy framework, build on the work of this inquiry, and provide
recommendations to government. The roundtable suggested that the taskforce
examine four key areas:
capacity of the sector;
access to capital;
strengthening the role of intermediaries; and
reviewing structural barriers to investment (including regulation,
legislation and terminology).
It also highlighted the need to develop an evaluation of social impact
and other forms of performance measurement.
The roundtable suggested that the taskforce operate for 6 to 12 months
and, given the extensive regulatory and taxation reforms for the sector over
the next 12 months, 'the Taskforce should work rapidly to provide some
clear guidance that aligns with these processes'.
It outlined that the taskforce should consist of a range of key players across
sectors and 'have a high level inter-face with government, particularly with
involvement of the Treasury as well as the other central federal government
An Expert Taskforce would require some resources to work
effectively. In bringing together the roundtable discussion, it is apparent to
CCA there are a small but passionate group of players who have many ideas about
what can be done to grow the finance capacity of the sector. By bringing these
champions together in a coherent way a solid and innovative policy framework
can be established.
Knode Pty Ltd and Foresters both suggested that the Australian taskforce
should be led from outside government.
Foresters argued that the taskforce 'should not be prone to the influence of
vested interests and should be capable of engaging both sides of the political
The PC recommended in its report that the proposed advisory panel should
be chaired by Treasury.
In evidence to the committee, Mr Fitzgerald explained that having Treasury
chair the panel included government in consideration of recommendations
relating to government costing and tax arrangements for the social economy. However,
he added that the PC report was not prescriptive about the model
of the taskforce.
Building on the work of the
Mr Ronalds of PM&C supported the calls for a taskforce to
accommodate a coordinated approach to developing a robust social capital
market. He argued that the taskforce could have a more ambitious timeframe than
the UK's SITF as Australia is in a position to build on the work that has been
done in other jurisdictions:
The Office for the Not-for-Profit Sector in Prime Minister
and Cabinet has been continuing to work on many of the issues that have come
before this committee, and we believe three initiatives in particular have significant
merit. The first is a social investment taskforce that could lead a national
dialogue, report on developments in social investment both here and
internationally, advise on steps to support the emergence of an effective
social impact investment market, oversee the development of initiatives to
encourage the emergence of new social enterprises, and build new collaborations
to support the role of social investment.
Ms Rosemary Addis from DEEWR also highlighted the importance of focused
dialogue and convening multiple sectors to develop the capital market for the
Ms Addis: Dialogue and leadership are incredibly
important. There is no doubt that in the UK, as evidenced by the profile that
Sir Ronald Cohen now has in this space, that the task force there has been
In any kind of innovation it is helpful to have both shared
spaces and credible people to coalesce people around the issues and
conversations. It is also helpful to have people who are fluent and able to
talk about the issues across sectors because the cultural issues are different.
Whether they are in government, the community sector or the private sector in
investment, the issues of everybody's landscapes are absolutely legitimate and
real. If we are going to carve new paths, we have to work out how we do that
well, how we work out what parts of the system are there for very good reason
and really matter, and where the room for change is. I think people do look to
high-profile leaders to also set an example and to help create the view that
these things are possible as well as paint a picture in concrete terms, as some
of those reports have done, of how people might actually go about making some
of it real.
Knode considered Australia could take advantage of the work of the
international taskforces to 'leap-frog' the development of a policy framework
for a robust capital market for the social economy in Australia.
From the foregoing discussion, three things are apparent. First, the
financing of the social economy sector in Australia is at an important stage of
its development. To catalyse potential financing opportunities for the sector
and move beyond the 'uncoordinated innovation' that has occurred to date, there
is a clear need for a body to advise stakeholders on how best to raise
awareness and promote collaboration. Second, this type of body has worked well
overseas. The UK and Canadian taskforces attest to how they can provide
strategic direction and encourage social investment. Third, on the evidence
received during this inquiry, there is clearly the demand for such a body.
Broad-based stakeholder support is important if the new body is to be
effective. In this regard, it would seem that the positive international
experience has been influential.
The committee recommends that a Social Finance Taskforce be established
to explore mechanisms and options for the development of a robust capital
market for social economy organisations in Australia. The taskforce should
build on the evidence of both the PC report and this inquiry, and can expedite
progress by examining the direction and accomplishments of the UK and Canadian
The Taskforce should include high profile, influential members who can
raise awareness of the progress of social investment in Australia. Taskforce
members should have a financial background and a keen appreciation of the needs
of the sector. The taskforce should have representation from:
the Departments of Treasury, Prime Minister and Cabinet and
Finance and Deregulation;
the mainstream finance sector;
the superannuation industry;
the philanthropic sector;
the social sector (including social enterprise); and
Importantly, the creation of a Social Finance Taskforce should be
distinct from the current arrangements to establish and advise the Charities
and Not-for-Profit Commission (ACNC) and the work of the Office for the
Not-for-Profit and the NFP Sector Reform Council (see Diagram 1.4). The
Taskforce should be a separate body, focused on financing the social economy
sector. If it is not, it would lose profile and the imperative of building a
capital market could be subsumed within other, albeit important, not-for-profit
issues. It is unclear how the mandate to increase social investment is
currently being addressed by the government, beyond the limited scope and
resources of the Office for the Not-for-Profit Sector. A taskforce will address
That noted, the committee believes that the Taskforce should be established
while the current regulatory reforms of the sector are underway to ensure that these
developments align with the social investment agenda.
A Social Finance Taskforce will have several benefits:
it will provide strategic policy direction and recommend
architecture for a sustainable framework for a sophisticated capital market
within the social economy;
it will provide ongoing advice to government to improve
efficiencies in funding of the sector and ensure that the provision of ongoing
government funding does not distort the market or constrain long-term progress;
it will guide the development of this emerging social capital
market and balance the supply of capital with the quality of organisations and
projects requesting it. Supply and demand must be progressed in parallel to
avoid imposing substandard products on investors, or a surge of social projects
with inadequate finance available. A taskforce will analyse supply and demand
within the social economy, and recommend options to coordinate the development
of social projects that correlates with an equivalent increase in financial
products and investors;
it will consider options to develop a viable and vibrant
financial intermediary market and assist financial intermediaries and financial
institutes to develop products that are suitable to the unique needs of social
economy organisations; and
it will raise the profile of social investment options in
Australia for social organisations and financial investors, and diversify the
investment options for the philanthropic sector.
A taskforce could investigate options to create social investment opportunities
of the scale to attract institutional investment to the sector.
The committee recommends that the government establish a Social Finance
Taskforce to assess mechanisms and options in the progress and development of a
robust capital market for social economy organisations in Australia. The
taskforce should initially report to government by July 2012.
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page