Last week, the Economic Development, Science and Innovation Committee provided its report on the bill, suggesting amendments including advisers' duty to put clients’ interests first, tweaks to definitions, the scope of nominated representatives, and dispute resolutions’ reporting requirements.

Yet the report faced criticism from adviser industry representatives, including Financial Advice NZ chief executive Katrina Shanks, who has called for greater clarity on the changes. Shanks said there was no clear line between sales and advice, no clear definition of sales advice, and a lack of certainty for small adviser firms.

Shanks’s concerns have been echoed by key figures in the mortgage adviser industry. John Bolton, of Squirrel Mortgages, and a member of Financial Advice NZ’s working group, said he was still waiting “on clarity on exactly what we have to do and by when” He added:  “There’s been plenty of false starts on regulation and timings.  We all accept that a more regulated environment is good and will come at some cost in terms of time and money.  It’s about getting the balance right.”

Bolton said it was important the new regulation did not impose a burden on smaller mortgage advisers: “Main things are ensuring high advice standards and competency but equally not overdoing it, recognising the costs on the industry especially smaller firms, and differentiating what is essentially product advice.”

Mark Collins, of adviser network Mike Pero Mortgages, describes last week’s Select Committee report as an “equivocal outcome”. He said his network and many other would face uncertainty over the amended bill: “They have done well on some things but not so well on others. There is a lot of rhetoric and people guessing what may or may not be required. We should engage with legislators, but they will make the final decisions.”