{"id":32733,"date":"2016-03-16T02:04:34","date_gmt":"2016-03-15T15:04:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/?p=32733"},"modified":"2026-03-11T11:44:34","modified_gmt":"2026-03-11T00:44:34","slug":"senate-committee-confirms-lif-legislation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/2016\/03\/16\/senate-committee-confirms-lif-legislation\/","title":{"rendered":"Senate Committee Confirms Unchanged LIF Legislation"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Senate Economics Committee (SEC) reviewing the Life Insurance Framework (LIF) legislation has recommended the Senate pass the bill as it stands.<\/p>\n

The SEC made only one recommendation in its report<\/a>\u00a0stating \u201cThe committee recommends the bill be passed\u201d, effectively removing the last barrier to the Senate doing so and progressing the passage of the Corporations Amendment (Life Insurance Remuneration Arrangements) Bill 2016<\/em> to the stage where it receives royal assent.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe committee recommends the bill be passed\u201d<\/h6>\n

In making this recommendation the SEC stated it was \u201c\u2026of the view that the bill contains provisions designed to ensure that consumers can access unbiased and appropriate advice when considering purchasing life insurance\u201d.<\/p>\n

It also presented a harsh view of the past actions of advisers stating they \u201c\u2026have thus far been allowed to provide advice in circumstances where their own interest in a significant commission is at odds with the interests of the consumer\u201d.<\/p>\n

While the report highlighted concerns within some submissions about a reduced advised life insurance market, the SEC stated the bill contained mechanisms to address those risks.<\/p>\n

\u201cIn particular, the powers conferred on ASIC ensure flexibility and responsiveness while the scheduled 2018 review provides an opportunity to correct any imbalances or pursue further reform,\u201d the report stated.<\/p>\n

“…the scheduled 2018 review provides an opportunity to correct any imbalances or pursue further reform”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The statements came at the end of the report, the majority of which summarised the issues raised by those who made submissions to the committee during the limited consultation period.<\/a><\/p>\n

While the committee received 265 submissions in total, 209 of those were received on form letters sent out by the Life Insurance Consumer Group with a further 56 submissions from advisers, licensees, industry associations and consumer groups.<\/p>\n

The two Labor members of the six-member SEC – Senator Chris Ketter<\/strong> and Senator Sam Dastyari<\/strong> \u2013 stated they welcomed the SEC report and the reform the bill would achieve.<\/p>\n

However, the two senators made additional comments in the report stating they noted concerns in the submissions that not all stakeholders were consulted in the creation of the new framework and the reform would negatively impact consumer choice but increase the cost of life insurance while decreasing adviser numbers as the market share of large institutions increased.<\/p>\n

In these additional comments, Ketter stated the concerns about the activities of large institutions were legitimate and Labor acknowledged the risk that these institutions may come to dominate the life insurance industry.<\/p>\n

He also pointed to previous Senate reviews into financial services and the recent CommInsure media coverage as example of these concerns stating the current inquiry into the life insurance advice industry by the Senate Economics References Committee was \u201cboth timely and most welcome\u201d.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Senate Economics Committee (SEC) reviewing the Life Insurance Framework (LIF) legislation has recommended the Senate pass the bill as it stands.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":32742,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,270],"tags":[4247],"class_list":["post-32733","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-compliance-regulation","category-remuneration","tag-feature","headers-new"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/32733","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=32733"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/32733\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/32742"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=32733"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=32733"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=32733"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}