ASIC wasting time and resources

FOFA financial planning industry cooper review financial services industry australian securities and investments commission parliamentary joint committee financial advice

31 March 2011
| By Mike Taylor |
image
image
expand image

ASIC, hard-pressed for funding and resources, has embarked on a costly exercise aimed at determining the quality of retirement advice at a time when the underlying rules of the game are clearly in a state of flux, writes Mike Taylor.

It is a long time since the newly elected Rudd Labor Government placed a further round of shadow-shopping on the ‘to do’ list for the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC).

A Federal Election has intervened, a Parliamentary Joint Committee (Ripoll) has had its say and the Future of Financial Advice (FOFA) changes are being debated.

So the bottom line appears to be that a regulator, hard-pressed for funding and resources, has embarked on a costly exercise aimed at determining the quality of retirement advice at a time when the underlying rules of the game are clearly in a state of flux as a result of the FOFA debate and the recommendations of the Cooper Review.

It might be added that ASIC is undertaking this shadow shopping exercise at exactly the same time it is participating as a ‘stakeholder’ and providing advice to the Government on issues relating to FOFA and the Cooper Review.

Many would argue that both the timing of the exercise and the resultant expenditure are highly inappropriate.

It does not matter that ASIC Commissioner, Greg Medcraft, has said the shadow shop will not be aimed at “naming and shaming” financial planners.

He ought to know as well as anyone else that there are elements within the financial services industry that will seek to publicly magnify any negative findings with respect to planners.

On the brighter side, ASIC has confirmed the shadow shop will include intra-fund advice provided by superannuation funds – something clearly necessary not only in the interests of fairness but also because of the manner in which the financial planning industry has evolved over the past three years.

Indeed, if ASIC were to do the shadow shopping job properly it might also find a way to test the value and validity of the so-called ‘industrialised advice’ mechanisms that have evolved as a direct result of the lighter-touch regulatory approach applying to intra-fund advice.

It has been nearly eight years since ASIC embarked on its first shadow shopping exercise, and it succeeded in identifying some genuine shortcomings in the financial planning industry that needed to be addressed.

The regulator’s second shadow shopping exercise served to reinforce some of the findings of the first, but also suggested that the industry had picked up its act.

It has been a long time since the last shadow shop and the industry has changed a great deal. It is now confronting further substantial change. ASIC’s time, money and resources would be better spent elsewhere.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

So we are now underwriting criminal scams?...

3 days 11 hours ago

Glad to see the back of you Steve. You made financial more expensive, not more affordable as you claim, and presided ...

1 week ago

Completely agree Peter. The definition of 'significant change is circumstances relevant to the scope of the advice' is s...

2 months 1 week ago

Original bidder Bain Capital, which saw its first offer rejected in December, has returned with a revised bid for Insignia Financial....

3 weeks 3 days ago

The corporate regulator has named its new chief executive, who is set to replace retiring interim CEO Greg Yanco in March....

3 weeks ago

The FAAA has secured CSLR-related documents under the FOI process, after an extended four-month wait, which show little analysis was done on how the scheme’s cost would a...

3 weeks 1 day ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS