Add new comment

When very directly questioned by Senator Amanda Stoker at the recent Senate hearings as to whether ASIC had been involved in the submissions and recommendations regarding the Code of Ethics, Stephen Glenfield elected to avoid that specific detail and instead provide a generalised answer stating that several groups were involved in providing feedback and submissions.
If ASIC were involved in the process as one of the several other organisations involved, why would Stephen Glenfield feel it necessary to not confirm this specific detail when questioned by Senator Stoker ?
It was a straightforward question that required a straightforward answer.
The issue is that none of this process has been straightforward at all.
It is widely suspected that interest groups such as CHOICE and the Consumer Action Law Centre may also have had input into the Code of Ethics and specifically into recommendations regarding the re-wording of Standard 3.
If this were to be true and with 3 current FASEA directors with significant background with these groups, is this process acceptable on any level when it is very widely known these groups have been aggressively campaigning for years against adviser remuneration models.
At the FPA Conference this week Stephen Glenfield and ASIC must be asked the direct question in a common forum whether ASIC were involved in the recommendation to revise Standard 3 and if so, exactly what was recommended by ASIC.
I fully expect that there will be many attendees at this conference who will be demanding answers to be forthcoming immediately with no option to be taking questions on notice whatsoever.