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
Ausbil shutters $27m long short fund
|Ausbil Investment Management has shuttered its Long Short Focus Fund, with $27 million in funds under management (FUM).
Ageing dynamics require holistic retirement planning: La Trobe
|As more Australians enter retirement, the phase increasingly resembles a "distinct" economic life cycle, making better retirement planning essential rather than just an opportunity for financial advisers.
Aware Super elevates data and AI with new promotions
|Artificial intelligence (AI)and data analytics are becoming increasingly central to investment decision-making, with Aware Super reshaping its investment leadership to strengthen how technology informs portfolio strategy.
Challenger open to TAL takeover at a better price
|Challenger will continue to engage with TAL Daiichi Life to get a better offer price, after it rejected the takeover bid earlier this week, stating the offer falls short of a level it could recommend to shareholders.
Further Reading
Products
Expert Feed
Featured Profile

Jacqueline Fernley
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
ARC POINT OCIO PTY LTD
ARC POINT OCIO PTY LTD
Jacqueline Fernley is a self-confessed nerd, a market animal and as of this year, her own boss.







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.