Regulation

Measuring the success of regulations

Wednesday 21st of September 2011

That is the view of Financial Markets Authority (FMA) chief Sean Hughes.

"It's early days, but if it doesn't result in better quality financial advice then one questions was it worthwhile?"

Hughes said he didn't believe in regulation for regulations sake, and "if we can't see investors having greater confidence in their adviser and returning to the market and seeking a broad diversification of products, then I would be saddened by that."

"All the cost and compliance burden, it would be questionable as to whether it was worth it."

Hughes also explained the thinking behind the FMA's controversial ‘cowboy' advertising campaign - and questioned whether the message was received as intended.

"Many New Zealanders were not aware that financial advisers were not regulated before hand," he said.

He said that the point of the ‘cowboy' campaign was to raise awareness that a point of difference exisited between those who were authorised and registered and those who were not.

"What we were trying to say through that advertisement - whether in fact everyone got that message or not - take the trouble to find out and have greater confidence in those who have taken that trouble."

Comments (4)
Daryl McAlinden
How exactly will the FMA measure the success of the new regulations? Will it be a subjective type measure i.e. public polls with a generic question? Alternatively will it be objective, such as the findings from the current FMA adviser audits measured against defined benchmarks? If the measures are not objective, then it will only be an exercise to justify additional regulatory control.
0 0
13 years ago

Ray Storey
If you're explaining , you're losing. Start again with a new ad agency, Sean.
0 0
13 years ago

Simon Rule
Dirty Harry your first paragraph sums up brilliantly the status of regulation to date so far. Well said!
0 0
13 years ago

Andy Phillipson
The 'Cowboy" advertisement failed completely and was totally inaccurate - the cowboys are still in the industry and still able to join obviously. The new Act just scared some of the more cautious advisers away! Legislation is still in its early stages, but does nothing to promote investor confidence or security. It simply gives them a course of action to take AFTER it all goes wrong! I have said this all along - the same investment mistakes will be made, and the same bad finance companies and loan sharks will continue to offer unsafe securities to uneducated investors without quality financial advice! In my opinion - yes, at this stage the new legislation is a big waste of time and money. I have far more relevant qualifications to my role than silly AFA status, and it involved 5 years of intense study and regular updates, yet they are not recognized by the FMA. Sour grapes - yes. Dumfounded by bureaucratic stupidity - yes. All the FMA had to do was Listen to the needs of clients, and do as they ask. Just like we already do.
0 0
13 years ago

Comments to GoodReturns.co.nz go through an approval process. Comments which are defamatory, abusive or in some way deemed inappropriate will not be approved.