MPs and the finance sector appear to be reaching a consensus on regulation of financial advisers.
Parliament's finance select committee heard submissions on the finance advisers' bill yesterday.
The bill was sparked by people losing their money after investing in high-risk companies based on the advice from people
getting commissions from the companies involved.
An initial version of the legislation was widely criticised by the sector for covering a wide range of advice and creating a cumbersome regulatory model.
Yesterday, the select committee heard from the sector and MPs said there appeared to be a growing consensus between them and submitters over the major points of the regime.
The Investment Savings and Insurance Association (ISI) chief executive, Vance Arkinstall, said his members supported the Securities Commission enforcing regulation.
This would work alongside a single professional body which would set standards. The ISI wanted both financial advisers and the institutions they worked for accredited.
Mr Arkinstall said this would mean the companies involved could also be held accountable for the actions of their employees.
The Real Estate Institute told MPs its members should be exempted from the bill as they were covered by a separate regulatory regime being overhauled.
The institute argued that a doubling up of regulation would double costs without doubling the protection for the public.
Some MPs quizzed institute members whether they did offer financial advice.
They were told there was sometimes a fine line between investment advice and real estate, but its members would be best dealt with under the real estate regime.
MPs were told the institute's members were not involved in investment seminars where people were encouraged to take out mortgages to invest in real estate. The institute said companies that did follow this practice should come under the financial advisers' regime.
- NZPA
