Compensation scheme of last resort delayed again

The Government has again put on hold implementing the compensation scheme of last resort (CSLR), as it has been delayed for budgetary reasons, according to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC).

The CSLR was expected to be put up for legislation by the middle of the year, with some of the funding arrangements announced as part of the Budget.

Karen Chester, ASIC deputy chair, was asked by as Senate Committee whether it had discussions with the Government over the compensation scheme of last resort being put in place.

Related News:

“As part of the Government’s response to the Hayne Royal Commission, CSLR was considered by a group comprising treasury as the chair.

“We have discussed CSLR in that context and there has been a deferral by the Government to deal with CSLR.

“We understand that it’s still on the radar and it is to be happening, but it has been pushed out for budgetary reasons.

“ASIC is a huge supporter of CSLR, it’s the final part of the vision of the Ramsey Report.”

Chester said any question over the status of CSLR was best put to Treasury, but she understood it were close to entering consultation.

“While the Government did accept the decision to do a CSLR after the Hayne Royal Commission, it does go back to the Ramsey Review,” Chester said.

“[The Ramsey Review] drew the line in the sand and set up the scheme for how it was meant to be implemented.

“The Government did exhaustive consultation on this then wanted to wait to see what came out of the Royal Commission.”

Recommended for you




LNP, Frydenberg, Hume & ASIC just trying to delay TELLING THE COSTS until post Election.
DO NOT TRUST THESE Adviser Haters.
ASIC, LNP, Frydenberg - TELL US HOW MUCH MORE YOU WANT TO SLAM ADVISERS, THUS SLAM OUR CLIENTS TO PAY FOR THIS MAD SCHEME ??? $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ = $10k / Adviser pa ?
These clown will not stop until Advisers costs are so how that Advisers are STRANGLED by BS REGS COSTS out of Business to make way for Banks ROBO Advice.

Put it off long enough and there will be no advisers left to pay it...

Fine by me!

My Question to all this, Should the Fund Managers be the ones made to contribute. Advice failing is covered by PI.
Product failure should be covered by the Fund Managers, The higher the risk the higher the premium they pay.
Considering most complaint made during the GFC by Client to adviser was about product failure, may also sort the wheat from the chaff when it comes to funds. Just an idea. Considering the margins they make it is a drop in the bucket for them.

Add new comment