Update on FASEA code guidance on the wayBY ELIZABETH MCARTHUR | FRIDAY, 29 NOV 2019 2:42PMFinancial Adviser Standards and Ethics Authority chief executive Stephen Glenfield has confirmed more guidance on the contested Code of Ethics is imminent. Related News |
Editor's Choice
Trustees, platforms, cyber risk under APRA spotlight
|Superannuation trustees, platforms and cyber resilience will be under more scrutiny in the 2027 financial year from the prudential regulator.
ASIC draws parallels between ASX and super trustee failures
|ASIC commissioner Simone Constant has urged superannuation trustees to make good use of member data to better understand their needs as they move towards and through retirement.
Perpetual hit with double whammy redemption, impairment
|Perpetual's earnings will be slugged with a massive impairment thanks to an unnamed client redeeming nearly $6.5 billion (US$4.6bn) from a strategy run by Thompson, Siegel & Walmsley LLC (TSW).
GQG hit by $21bn outflows, FUM falls
|GQG Partners has recorded US$15.1 billion ($21.2 billion) in net outflows in the first half of 2026, sending funds under management (FUM) down 9.5% despite resilient investment performance across several of its strategies.
Further Reading
Products
Featured Profile

Andrew Gregory
CHIEF ADVICE OFFICER
UNISUPER
UNISUPER
After 25 years, Andrew Gregory remains motivated by the impact financial advice can have on Australians' lives. As UniSuper's chief advice officer, he is not slowing down on any of his current ambitions. Matthew Wai writes.







As a senior Financial Planner of 25 years in the game. I am very concerned about possible future interpretations of the Adviser Code of Ethics. We need a crystal clear code that is in unison with the law that is passed by parliament. I don't think that Glenfield's responses to questions are very helpful, as he seems to be saying that it all about the "Vibe" of the code....I think that the Ethics Code enforces are going to have a field day with this in the future.
De Gori's comments about only needing guidance if there is ambiguity in the code are partly correct. He's either not a lawyer?or being disingenuous. A court will always look at the terms of the Code as directed and look at the Guidance, and particularly the Values which are *paramount* (remember). The bulk of the terminology used including "conflict of interest" are already defined in the common law. So, the courts aren't just going to interpret the Code in any way they want. The Values and objectives are all consistent with basic fiduciary concepts, so the level of uncertainty is really not as claimed.
As for FASEA only creating the Code and not enforcing it, all I can say is, GOOD, that follows a constitutional principle called "separation of powers"! Hardly a criticism of FASEA.