{"id":47461,"date":"2019-12-10T15:44:45","date_gmt":"2019-12-10T04:44:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/?p=47461"},"modified":"2019-12-11T06:45:12","modified_gmt":"2019-12-10T19:45:12","slug":"poll-results-13","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/2019\/12\/10\/poll-results-13\/","title":{"rendered":"Advisers Divided on APRA&#8217;s IP Intervention"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"polls-224\" class=\"wp-polls\">\n\t\t<div class=\"pollHeader\"><strong>Do you support APRA's pre-emptive move intended to deliver long-term sustainability for income protection insurance?<\/strong><\/div><div id=\"polls-224-ans\" class=\"wp-polls-ans\"><ul class=\"wp-polls-ul\">\n\t\t<li>No <small>(48%)<\/small><div class=\"pollbar\" style=\"width: 48%\" title=\"No (48% | 195 Votes)\"><\/div><\/li>\n\t\t<li>Yes <small>(40%)<\/small><div class=\"pollbar\" style=\"width: 40%\" title=\"Yes (40% | 162 Votes)\"><\/div><\/li>\n\t\t<li>Not sure <small>(12%)<\/small><div class=\"pollbar\" style=\"width: 12%\" title=\"Not sure (12% | 47 Votes)\"><\/div><\/li>\n\t\t<\/ul><div style=\"text-align: center\"><\/div><\/div>\n\t\t<input type=\"hidden\" id=\"poll_224_nonce\" name=\"wp-polls-nonce\" value=\"e6b5ce710b\" \/>\n<\/div>\n\n<p>Advisers are evenly divided on the question of whether APRA should have intervened on income protection insurance sustainability (see: <a href=\"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/2019\/12\/03\/apra-demands-new-course-for-ip-sustainability\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">APRA Sets New Course For IP Sustainability<\/a>).<\/p>\n<p><!--more-->As we go to press, 46 percent of those taking our poll have voted &#8216;no&#8217; to the question of whether they support APRA&#8217;s intervention. An almost equal number (43 percent), however, support APRA&#8217;s move, while around one in ten (11 percent) are on the fence.<\/p>\n<p>Based around your feedback, the two differing schools of thought go something like this:<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Supporting APRA&#8217;s Intervention:<\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Decades ago it was obvious that all the bells and whistles offered under IP weren&#8217;t sustainable. The life companies have had plenty of notice.<\/li>\n<li>If something isn&#8217;t done, there won&#8217;t be a future for income protection insurance, so best to tackle it now.<\/li>\n<li>Life companies are all about protecting their competitive advantage and fear the consequences associated with being the &#8216;first mover&#8217;. So, APRA had to act.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Against APRA&#8217;s Intervention:<\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>It&#8217;s not an isolated issue &#8211; few things are. The problem is mostly related to over-regulation (read the Life Insurance Framework Reforms) which in turn has led to lower new business inflows to cover the outflow of claims. So, it&#8217;s not product design that&#8217;s the main issue; it&#8217;s industry over-regulation.<\/li>\n<li>Generally-speaking, history has demonstrated that when regulators become involved, the outcome will create further issues &#8211; an &#8216;even greater mess&#8217;.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Other comments have included a point centred around the adviser&#8217;s mandated requirement to respect their clients&#8217; best interests. One adviser therefore asks whether it&#8217;s in the client&#8217;s best interest that in future, they will no longer be offered the opportunity to be covered under IP to age 65.<\/p>\n<p>Other voices have called for the regulator to sit down with the life companies and other stakeholders for the purpose of finding other potential solutions to IP sustainability &#8211; in a more collaborative environment. Unfortunately, though, in this case, we think the horse has already bolted and there&#8217;ll be no turning back from APRA&#8217;s prescriptive solution for the future sustainability of disability income insurance.<\/p>\n<p>Our poll remains open for one final week, as we welcome your further thoughts on this critically-important issue, which will have far-reaching consequences&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Advisers are evenly divided on the question of whether APRA should have intervened on income protection insurance sustainability (see: APRA Sets New Course For IP Sustainability).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":47505,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,49,4],"tags":[4247],"class_list":["post-47461","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-compliance-regulation","category-polls","category-products","tag-feature"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47461","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=47461"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47461\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/47505"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=47461"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=47461"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/riskinfo.com.au\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=47461"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}