Body says the enquiry was not unexpected as the FMA had made noises that it wanted to learn more about the insurance industry.

He says ANZ-owned life company OnePath is happy to take part. “We have seen reasonable activity in our book, so we have got pretty good information.”

Body says it is important that the enquiry isn’t turned into a war on commissions. Rather he sees it as an opportunity to build a platform the next level of sustainably in the industry.

“I sense it is a combination of increased transparency to the customer and a commission structure that balances the initial work up front with the on-going requirement of the servicing of customer.”

“We don’t want this debate to be about commissions. We know there are a whole bunch of really skilled professionals out there who need to get paid for what they do.

“The debate has to be about the long-term industry structure sustainability and how we build the reputation of the industry.”

The majority of the industry performs an exception job at getting New Zealanders insured, Body says. However, there is a very small minority of advisers who are moving business for the wrong reasons.

They “are spoiling the industry for vast amount of professional people in it,” he says.

“The industry itself needs to decide if it wants to deal with people who are doing that.”

He says the most rationale approach and the approach OnePath is taking is to stop dealing with the advisers who churn business.

“We will support the part of industry doing a great job.”

Body says there needs to be a degree of self-regulation, and he thinks that is starting to happen.

“All successful industries self regulate,” he says.

Any change though has to be carefully.

“We have to be careful to recognise that there is a bunch of great people in the industry doing a great things for New Zealanders,” he says. “We can’t afford to let this be a big industry problem.”

Body says the spotlight is now on this part of the industry and it is going to intensify the debate about what’s the kind of conduct of the industry and the long-term sustainable structure.

“It’s got us all thinking about change,” he says. “It’s not a debate of manufacturers against advisers it’s a debate about building a strong sustainable industry.”

Body says he supports Trowbridge’s view on conflicted remuneration and transparency to the consumer, but not his views on remuneration levels.

“I don’t necessary think the structure in terms of commission works for New Zealand. There are alternative solutions which probably work better for everyone.”

Body says OnePath have been thinking about this and doing some work on what commission structures may look like in the future.

He says one of the key issues is working out what a sustainable remuneration structure is for the industry in the future.

OnePath is doing some work on this, he says. The total remuneration to advisers probably won’t change much, but there maybe changes in the timing of payments to advisers.

“I kinda think the total rem package looks OK (at the moment),” he says. However it’s “probably a little bit too biases towards upfront.”

The future model “has to be sustainable from the industy’s point of view but critically from the adviser point of view as they are trying to run businesses .“

“We’re thinking about it but we are not about to jump on the lower upfront, higher renewals anytime soon.”

When it comes to the question of whether policyholders who have been churned have been disadvantaged he says it’s hard to know, but it doesn't look like a significant issue.