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
Aware Super reshapes governance team, appoints chief risk officer
Aware Super has announced a leadership reshuffle, appointing a new chief risk officer amid the departure of its long-serving group executive of legal.
IFM lifts stake in Atlas Arteria to 40% after upping offer price
IFM Investors has raised its stake in Atlas Arteria from 34.5% to 38.3% in an on-market stock purchase, just a day after it raised its offer price for the toll road operator to $5.10 per security.
Zenith bolsters research, investment capabilities with new hires
Zenith has announced two senior appointments to strengthen its research and portfolio management divisions.
Regulators push for stronger stress-testing capability, resilience
The ability to remain resilient and manage liquidity pressures amid severe, multi-dimensional stress scenarios is an area of focus that APRA and ASIC want superannuation funds to improve.
Products
Featured Profile

Brian Redican
CHIEF ECONOMIST
NEW SOUTH WALES TREASURY CORPORATION
NEW SOUTH WALES TREASURY CORPORATION
What makes an economist an economist? TCorp chief economist Brian Redican reflects on over three decades of navigating Australia's economic cycles. Riddhima Talwani 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.