While industry lobbyists have been kept busy of late with debate raging over the definition of independence, advisers associated with the Life Insurance Customer Group (LICG) have been actively pursuing their agenda in the background.
Peter Corrie, an LICG supporter and director of self-licensed firm Rynco, has approached the NSW Chamber of Commerce recently in addition to a number of federal parliamentarians to argue against the government’s proposed changes to life insurance remuneration.
“The chamber has the power and influence with the government, particularly the present government, to challenge these regulations,” Mr Corrie said in a letter to stakeholders, seen by ifa.
“It also has enormous financial resources and a legal team to be effective in changing arrangements for the benefit of business.
“Politicians … on both the Liberal and Labor sides need to know that they have made a grave mistake by not acting in the interests of the life insurance industry, licensees, financial advisers/planners or the consumer.”
The email chain indicates that lobbying efforts against LIF are still ongoing within the industry and the LICG itself is still operational.
The lobby group has faded from the spotlight since a number of its members were defeated in their push to change the AFA constitution in late 2016.
A number of LICG members subsequently left the AFA membership, ifa understands.
Speaking to The ifa Show podcast in March, in his first media appearance as AFA chief executive, Philip Kewin said uniting the AFA membership was a top priority for his leadership.
And the lobbying needs to continue until there is a consumer benefit in the reforms. We also need to stop letting legislators continue to pile on the paperwork – change is necessary but not just piling more on top of more. Time to go back to the beginning and implement cost effective sensible client centric legiation
Is there anything in LIF that prevents insurers from paying advisers a bonus based on a certain persistency rate of inforce business? Something for the LICG to take up with the regulator?
Peter Corrie should be congratulated on taking the good fight further! remember the old, gold, adage: “All that is required for evil to triumph is for good ment to do nothing”. No, I do not feel using the word EVIL there is over exaggerating. These politicians, life groups and special interest groups that are possessed with feathering their own nests at the expense of ‘client best interest’ should be ashamed of themselves. Don’t start me on AFA or FPA!! This once fantastic industry is now a pawn for these bloodsuckers and the advisers and clients need to stand back-to-back to survive the self interest of these seemingly powerful groups. Thank God for the peter Corries of this world.
Good on the LICG. The attack on commissions is ideological clap trap. Stand by for some of the insurers to jump on the bandwagon after a year or so of diminishing returns
Hahahahaaa!! Yes, indeed, you have it right anonymous! That will be a sight to behold. They should be careful for what they wish. Just wait until all the advisers have been driven from the industry by these ridiculous FOFA commission changes. Then they’ll have their little eyes opened and poo their pants when they see their revenue drop by double figures each year. Dear oh bloody dear. They just have no idea. They’ll get their 2 year clawback period and their reduced commissions just as they want. But remember they are “passionately committed to the adviser distribution model” – don’t forget that now! Sad joke. The life companies are nothing without ‘proper’ advisers who know how to sell. Dress it up anyway you please but they are intent on driving us from the game. What else can we assume when they did nothing to stop commissions and clawback situations developing? They could have stopped both in their tracks if they’d have wanted. We’ll see how the land lays in 5 years . . . life companies won’t be happy – robo advice hasn’t a chance in hell of saving the life companies when we are all gone and we will indeed be gone. New Uni recruits, God bless ’em, won’t have the clout or know-how, en masse, to sell enough to save them either. We’ll see . . .
Good on them because we are not seeing it from the AFA or FPA who are in the pockets of the instos. At least the LICG are getting some honest truth out there unlike the corruption we have seen from the FSC, AFA, FPA and even ASIC
[quote=Anonymous]Waste of time , move on and put your energy into making it work in practice , or better still don’t move on others who have can reap the rewards[/quote]
What your saying is sit back and accept the unacceptable without a fight based on the principle of right and wrong versus a principle of mistruths, misinformation, collusion and misuse of market power in the name of profit.
No, what I am saying is that over a number of years, lobbying has been done and some amendments put in. It is now in law and it is not going to change, fight the battles you can win like structuring your business appropriately for the future
Plenty of other laws have been overturned or amended after implementation. Particularly when there are unintended consequences or it was clear that the perspective of some important stakeholders was never taken into account. Yes “lobbying has been done”, but it was primarily by those who stood to gain from the changes. There was no effective lobbying done on behalf of the millions of consumers who will be negatively impacted by LIF.
Good on them- at least someone in the industry has been fighting this battle for us. All advisers in their right mind should be behind them.
Waste of time , move on and put your energy into making it work in practice , or better still don’t move on others who have can reap the rewards
I’m not overly concerned about risk commissions myself as I don’t focus on that area, but i’m pretty much convinced that every time we sit back and….accept the change and work with it…..we end up with more regulatory requirements, enforcement, and now we’re losing control of remuneration methods. Our industry associations have not been on the front foot. They clearly have no idea or foresight, just like ASIC. A new and bigger risk SOA…wow, thanks ASIC. That’s really useful. There’s no plan for the future, we just plod along with outdated reactive policy to the extent our relevance is now being questioned.