Latest Poll – ‘Qualified’ Life Co Advisers?

I support the proposition that life insurance companies should be permitted to deliver limited advice directly to policy holders.
  • Disagree (66%)
  • Agree (26%)
  • Not sure (8%)

In light of more discussion and details emerging around the prospect of life company-employed ‘qualified advisers’ delivering limited advice to policy holders, we’ve dusted-off our poll from September 2023 to gauge whether there’s been any change in adviser sentiment towards this initiative.

Borne from one of the recommendations made in the final report of Michelle Levy’s Quality of Advice Review, insurers, together with super funds and banks, will soon have the mandated capacity to employ staff to provide limited personal advice to policy holders, members and customers respectively.

For the purpose of this poll, our gaze is directed toward the future qualified adviser staff to be employed by life companies, where the underlying rationale, as stated by Levy in her final report recommendation – to address the alarming reduction in consumer access to financial advice – is that:

Some personal advice does not need the skills, expertise and judgment of a financial adviser…

“Some personal advice does not need the skills, expertise and judgment of a financial adviser and should be able to be provided by other people (and entities).”

We’ve reported CALI’s recently-disclosed position on the minimum education qualifications it believes should attach to qualified advisers employed by life companies (see: CALI Confirms Minimum Qualification Position…).

The council has also doubled-down in highlighting the critical role authorised representatives continue to play in the distribution of life insurance advice, stressing any limited and basic advice delivered by life company-employed staff in future will only serve to complement the more complex advice which remains within the domain of financial advisers, whether they be risk specialists or generalists.

Nine months ago, there was scepticism demonstrated by a majority of the adviser community around the retention of life company-employed staff to provide advice to policy holders and what this might mean, with the eventual outcome being more foe then friend:

The result of our poll conducted in September 2023, revealing a majority advisers did not support life company staff delivering limited personal advice. Has anything changed in the nine months since we asked you this question…?

Has anything changed for you?

There are more issues to address – some of the finer points, including what the minimum qualifications should be for this new breed of qualified adviser and exactly how this adviser determines when the policy holder’s advice needs have moved from simple to complex.

Notwithstanding we don’t have all the answers yet, how are you placed today with regard to this proposition? tell us what you think and we’ll report back next week…


  1. Like everything in life, the devil is in the detail.

    What usually happens whenever a suggestion or recommendation is put forward, there is a flurry of varying opinions and once the vested interest brigades jump aboard, the vision of light and beacon of hope for better times, turns out to be a pile of dog poo dressed up as fertilizer.

    Just look at virtually every investigation, Royal Commission / Witch hunt, our Industry had to endure over the last decade and we can all see the end result of newer, better rules and Regulations, that were going to make the provision of Advice, easier and more affordable, that in fact, actually did the exact opposite.

    The answer to perceived issues was the same 10 years ago as it is today.

    Nothing has changed, except new faces who are following a set script, while ignoring the blindingly obvious.

Comments are closed.