Lobbying did not stall adviser education standards: ASIC
The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has vehemently denied being swayed by lobbying groups to suspend its adviser competency push.
A media article this week alleged that a "confidential" letter from nine industry groups — including the Financial Planning Association (FPA) and Financial Services Council (FSC) - encouraged the regulator to put its adviser education standards, laid out in consultation paper 212 and 215, on hold until the industry had time to address any changes in a holistic manner.
However, a spokesman for ASIC told Money Management there was no confidential letter, nor a pause on delivering standards due to lobbying.
"This letter was not a factor in ASIC's decision to put its work on CPs 212 and 215 on hold," he said.
Instead, he said the review of adviser competence announced by former Assistant Treasurer, Senator Arthur Sinodinos, was behind the decision to suspend CP 212.
"There are certain features of ASIC's preferred model to improve adviser training and competence (eg a mandatory national exam) that are best delivered through Parliamentary law reform," he said.
"In these circumstances it made sense for ASIC to put its review on hold pending Government consideration of the issue of adviser training and competence."
He also said ASIC published all submissions from industry groups on its website.
Recommended for you
With AMP advisers moving to Entireti and Insignia being the subject of a private equity bidding war, how can deals be navigated to ensure minimal stress and uncertainty for staff and advisers?
There are seven key mistakes that financial advice businesses need to steer clear of in 2025 to avoid hindering their business growth and profitability, according to Adviser Ratings.
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 affect financial advisers.
While advisers are increasingly eyeing private markets and alternative investments, two reports have underlined the lack of investor understanding that persists among both advisers and clients.
