Regulatory objectivity vital
Editorial Comment
Much as a judge or magistrate has a duty to stay impartial when hearing matters which come before their courts, so too does a Commonwealth regulator have a duty to remain objective.
Thus, the sweeping and emotive language used about financial planners by the chairman of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), Greg Medcraft, in answering questions at the National Press Club last week was inappropriate and arguably raises questions about the regulator's ability to be seen as fair and objective.
Medcraft's seemingly emotive response to questions asked about financial planners is explicable in the context of a year during which much attention was focused on the enforceable undertakings imposed on Commonwealth Financial Planning and Macquarie, but seemed to ignore the manner in which those events were leveraged by the political forces who mounted the campaign against the Government's Future of Financial Advice (FOFA) changes.
Further, intentionally or not, his comments served to tarnish the reputations of many highly ethical and hard-working financial planners while diminishing the achievements of the Financial Planning Association (FPA) and Association of Financial Advisers (AFA) in seeking to lift standards and rid the sector of bad apples.
Mr Medcraft is not a career public servant. If he were, he would likely have stuck to a carefully-prepared script and tempered any comments capable of giving rise to perceptions of bias.
The ASIC chairman is entitled to his personal views about the financial planning industry, but his comments at the National Press Club would be seen by many as having not only unfairly tarnished an entire profession but as having diminished his own office.
- Mike Taylor
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.
