In a statement, Ms Loane said the FSC supports the bill to reform life insurance advice, adding that its provisions are a “step in the right director” in removing “conflicts” from the industry.
“The relevant legislation has bipartisan support and is currently before the parliament. We urge swift passage in the [next] sitting week,” she said.
As part of the legislation, the FSC will introduce a code of practice for life insurers to adhere to, Ms Loane added.
“The Life Insurance Code of Practice will introduce new binding standards for life insurance companies and will be implemented in July 2016,” she said.
“The Code, which is still under development, has involved working closely with regulators, consumer advocates and the industry to set standards for selling insurance, claims handling and assisting vulnerable customers.”
Ms Loane added that the life insurance reforms are also being supported by separate reforms to increase adviser education and professional standards.
“This will serve to strengthen advisers and the advice profession,” she said.
“Under the proposals, new advisers will be required to complete a university degree, an exam, a professional year and be subject to a code of ethics and undertake continuing professional development.”
So, where is the media release from Sally Loane now following the 4 Corners program?
This now places enormous pressure on the FSC as one of their large corporate members is now embroiled in significant controversy which appears to be in direct conflict with Sally Loane’s statements and very much in conflict with the FSC Mission Statement.
The FSC Mission Statement includes the following statements:
“The Financial Services Council is committed to:
being open, transparent and collaborative;
encouraging ethical and equitable behaviour by members through the development of industry standards;”
If there are members of the FSC that are not compliant with or adhering to the values and objectives of the FSC and in direct conflict with the parameters of establishing a Life Insurance Code of Conduct, then one would assume the FSC is currently not in an appropriate position to be a participant in any discussion or debate regarding the Life Insurance Framework until it is determined that every one of their member’s business practices regarding insurance policy definitions and claims management processes is thoroughly and independently audited.
If Kelly O’Dwyer now continues to accept input or advice from the FSC, then it would be a clear indication she is prepared to overlook possible systemic issues within the corporate sector and to continue to take the easier path of attacking the independent advisers who serve as an invaluable conduit between their clients and the insurers and provide invaluable strategy and technical advice to consumers who need the knowledge and experience of a quality adviser relationship.
The FSC makes the CBA look ethical.
Of course the FSC would be desperate to get these reforms through which only increase insurance companies profits and have a negative effect for the customer.
Their is no onus on the FSC, just a promise that they will put together a code of practice that will probably end up as no further benefit to the customer. How do these people sleep at night?
Good to see there are a few parliament members starting to question the consumer benefits (none).
The ESTABLISHMENT in action powerful lobby groups funding the FSC to get things done and the FSC throwing money at political parties as donations which really is a form of blood money, wake up Malcolm Turnbull the wool is being pulled tightly over your eyes and the parliament as well.