LIF being rushed to avoid ACCC scrutiny: LICG

In a statement, the LICG argued that the FSC has opted to hastily force the LIF through Parliament with messy legislation because it did not believe it would survive ACCC scrutiny.

“The FSC has no data on which to justify their position, no rationale behind reducing remuneration to their recommended level, and no one has been able to specify one single benefit to consumers,” the LICG said.

“There is no evidence of ‘churn’. No one has even defined ‘churn’.

“That would make it difficult to justify to the ACCC.”

The LICG also questioned why the FSC has not gone to the ACCC, if it believes its own arguments about ‘churning’ and significant consumer benefits and has sufficient evidence to substantiate these claims.

“Had industry gone to the ACCC with a proposition that could provide a better outcome for consumers, despite the negative impact on some industry stakeholders, such reforms could have been implemented a year ago,” the LICG said.

“Consumers deserve to be able to trust that our financial services sector representatives are acting for them, and not just for the shareholders of the huge organisations that make up the FSC.”

Adrian Flores

Adrian Flores is a deputy editor at Momentum Media, focusing mainly on banking, wealth management and financial services. He has also written for Public Accountant, Accountants Daily and The CEO Magazine.

You can contact him on [email protected].