Speculation is rife in the industry as people try to guess the names of the 90 individuals being investigated by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) who face virtual expulsion from senior positions in the industry. The trouble is that HIH Royal Commissioner Justice Neville Owen only identified 17 individuals who he thought might be worthy of judicial attention.

Last week Charles Littrell, the APRA Executive GM and spokesman on HIH issues, said APRA is considering disqualifying up to 90 individuals from “responsible person” positions in the Australian insurance industry because of their involvement with the HIH collapse.

So who are the APRA 90? The regulator’s Head of Public Affairs, Susan Morey, said although Justice Owen didn’t identify 90 individuals, a combination of the report’s findings and APRA’s own investigation did.

“No, the report didn’t name 90 people, but APRA has identified about that many with help from the report’s findings and our own investigation,” she said. “Basically it’s likely that very few will actually be disqualified, and there are varying forms of participation with the insurer’s collapse. We’re not just looking at dishonesty.”

So what else are they looking at? Last week Mr Littrell, who wasn’t available for comment yesterday – he is overseas – said the royal commissioner’s report had added weight and substance to the regulator’s own information, and individuals targeted had possibly breached “fitness and propriety” requirements in the Insurance Act.

Presumably APRA is prepared to go beyond Justice Owen’s findings. His report said: “If, during the course of the hearings, publicity was given to an allegation against or about a person or company and there is no express finding against that individual or entity in the report, then it is to be taken that I have made no such finding…

“Where there is no finding in this report against the person or company, the reputation of that person or company emerges entirely free of any adverse implications. It must be seen and judged accordingly.”

But not, apparently, by APRA, which presumably has additional information that wasn’t for some reason aired in the royal commission.

Ms Morey says the regulator’s investigations could take “anywhere between 30 days and a year”.

“From here it’s a strict process of investigation that would be hard to put a time limit on,” she said. “There’s been a variety of different breaches and they’ll all have to be looked at.”