Did ASIC cover for FASEA code shortcomings?

australian securities and investments commission ASIC FASEA AFA association of financial advisers FPA financial planning association code of ethics Senate Estimates

28 November 2019
| By Mike |
image
image
expand image

Just a week before the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) announced its facilitative approach to its oversight of the Financial Adviser Standards and Ethics (FASEA) code of conduct, FASEA was urged to ask AISC for a one-year adviser code exemption.

The call for the one-year adviser code exemption was contained in a formal submission made to FASEA by the Association of Financial Advisers (AFA) which had declared that irrespective of was done to the code, it would be virtually impossible for the financial advice profession to implement the required changes in time.

The AFA and the Financial Planning Association (FPA) have therefore taken great meaning out of ASIC’s formal statement that, in dealing with licensees around the code, it “will take into account the context in which AFS licensees are operating” and that “this includes the current dynamic regulatory environment, the timing of guidance provided by FASEA about the meaning of the code, and the evolving industry understanding about the meaning and implications of the code”.

The ASIC statement reflects a large number of the issues raised by the AFA and the FPA both with FASEA and with ministerial staffers in Canberra.

FASEA has been asked why it has not published the submissions filed with it as a result of the consultation process, in circumstances where its web site reveals 37 written submission were made with only three of them being listed as “confidential submissions”.

Importantly, ASIC was not listed as having filed a submission with respect to the Code of Ethics consultation between 20 March and 1 June, last year, nor in the consultation period between 21 November and 19 December.

However, FASEA chief executive, Stephen Glenfield has confirmed to Senate Estimates that submissions were received from ASIC giving rise to committee questions around the content of those submissions.

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?...

2 days 12 hours ago

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

6 days 12 hours 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 2 days 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 ago

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

2 weeks 6 days ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS