FASEA left way open for further code adjustments

In one of its last answers to Parliamentary questions before its role was announced as being devolved to Treasury and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), the Financial Adviser Standards and Ethics Authority (FASEA) signaled the possibility of further changes to its code of ethics.

Answering questions on notice to the Senate Economics Committee, FASEA said that while consultations around the code had been completed its work on the code had not and that change was possible.

“Consultation on the draft guide has concluded,” it said. “FASEA will review and give due regard to all stakeholder submissions to determine whether any change to either the code of ethics or the guide is appropriate.

Related News:

“FASEA will continue to work with stakeholders to implement COE standards that are understood and workable without being prescriptive,” the FASEA answer said.

However, with FASEA’s code development role now having been devolved to Treasury, it is expected that any changes to the code of ethics will be determined by the department once new arrangements are put in place.

While the FASEA board will cease to direct business and policy with respect to the code, it is understood that a number of staff working within the authority have been transferred to a section of Treasury.




Recommended for you

Comments

Comments

Same FARSEA clowns just under new ownership.
And that ownership of ASIC were the ones using “paid for comment”, conflicted, undisclosed, so called academic research to screw Advisers with Standard 3.
Yep I’m sure the new ownership will do NOTHING to make FARSEA more real world usable.

Welcome to 2021 the year of change ??? I don’t think so ! Just more restrictive actions to an already unworkable and outrageous set of rules

I assume this article has been published for it's comedic value. I particularly like the following quote - 'FASEA will review and give due regard to all stakeholder submissions to determine whether any change to either the code of ethics or the guide is appropriate'
In FASEA's short existence, I saw zero evidence that the organisation gave any regard to the views of the most important stakeholders of all - ie. financial advisers and their clients. The board should hang their collective heads in shame. What a terrible indictment that FASEA was so broken that it had to be completely disbanded after just a few years. I don't have a problem with some staff members picking up jobs in the new entity, but the directors should never again be given government roles in positions of authority.

Surely it is now time for the FASEA Board members who are advisers to resign, and distance themselves the unworkable Code of Ethics and conflicted education requirements. Matthew Rowe, a former adviser representative on the FASEA Board, recently publicly stated that Standard 3 should be changed back to the original wording it had when he was on the Board.

I understand the theory that adviser representatives need to be part of FASEA to contribute to the process and prevent even worse outcomes. But unfortunately they appear to have been sidestepped or steamrolled. How much worse could it be? The continued presence of adviser representatives on the Board allows FASEA to justify their biased and conflicted policies on the basis of so called "adviser involvement" in their development.

If anyone was looking for a Case Study in how NOT to implement new regulations which affect thousands of advisers and their clients, this is the one to use.
The complete lack of consulation with those actually involved in the industry, acceptance of input from ASIC and its conflicted "Consumer Research", input from academics who operate in a glorified alternative universe and not the real world and then finally to put these inplace and having to still be issuing guidance notes which do not clarify, but further muddy the waters after 12 months when these became active.
Moving the responsibility for the COE to ASIC is not going to solve the problem as this conflicted regulator has constantly shown that it also will not consult with actual practitioners and seems hell bent on putting Financial Planners out of business. This is completely at the expense of consumers who need cost effective advice which will never happen under the current regime of never ending increased costs and regulations.

'..... signaled the possibility of further changes to it's code of ethics' ...... 'a number of staff working within the authority have been transferred to a section of Treasury'. We continue to deal with an unworkable Code of Ethics which are highly likely to be 'tweeked' and which appear to continue to be administered by a similar group of people whose competence and transparency is questionable. FASEA being closed down has simply bought the authorities more time to clean up this mess (I'm not sure that it ever will be) whilst the clock continues to tick for those advisers are required to spend time and resources prove that they know what they have been doing for years !!!

This can't be good news, because advisers and clients are not considered to be stakeholders.

In a Blues Brothers like moment I can see FASEA claiming they consulted with BOTH of their stakeholders.

Choice AND ASIC!

Whats the point of an exam on a code that is obscure and continously changing?

Exactly !

Add new comment