Former APRA chairman John Laker has rejected the suggestion that regulators have a bias against the smaller end of town when it comes to enforcement.
John Laker, former chair of APRA and member of the Commonwealth Bank review panel, was questioned at the 18th annual Wraps, Platforms and Masterfunds conference about perceived differences in regulator responses to non-compliance.
Shartru chief executive Robert Coyte asked Mr Laker why businesses like the Commonwealth Bank appear to receive less severe punishments than their smaller counterparts.
“At an adviser level, at that smaller level, to have your career taken away by a banning order, it’s a substantial impact and I do think that there’s a common view out there that the big end of town get treated considerably differently in that they just get a slap on the wrist,” he said.
Dr Laker rejected the idea that two sets of rules existed.
“I know from my experience at APRA that we didn’t differentiate between the big end and small end of town,” Mr Laker said.
“There was no criteria by size, but you’re right in that if you’re the only one with capital in the business you’re most affected. You’re the shareholder bearing the brunt.
“I’ve never been myself conscious that there’s been a different set of rules. I don’t think it’s set up that way, but I can understand why you might perceive it differently.”
APRA has pledged to up its scrutiny of how banks, insurers and superannuation trustees are managing the financial risks of climate change to...
The corporate regulator will have more powers to hold financial services industries to account for misconduct under a new government proposa...
Around 201 investors have received approximately $1.5 million in one of multiple class action claims against a former investment manager a...