by Rob Hosking
Yesterday the finance and expenditure select committee released a second interim report on the Financial Advisers Bill. The latest set of recommendations includes:"The idea of having a commissioner of financial advisers is a good one: we just don't think it should be on the Securities Commission," he told Good Returns.
"We're very concerned about the prospect of having the Securities Commission being the policeman, the setter of standards, the court of appeal…the whole process in fact.
"That doesn't mean we have concerns about the commission itself: it is just that the principle of natural justice suggests you should have the disciplinary body separate from the rule setting and investigative body."
FAANZ also believes the focus of the regulation "should be advice based rather than product based."
"The categories they have come up with…. well, category two, the more lightly regulated one, would include some of the Blue Chip products. It is not easy to distinguish between which sort of products require higher protection and which do not."
The group also has "strong reservations" about the proposal for certifying institutions.
COMMENT: Change of plan, but are we there yet?
What do you think of these changes? Email your comments to editor@goodreturns.co.nz
Rob Hosking is a Wellington-based freelance writer specialising in political, economic and IT related issues.
« News Round Up | Sovereign takes regulation bull by the horns » |
Special Offers
© Copyright 1997-2025 Tarawera Publishing Ltd. All Rights Reserved