In a keynote address by ASIC Chair, James Shipton at Committee for Economic Development of Australia (CEDA) event in Melbourne yesterday, it appears the regulator will hold public hearings about responsible lending practices.
He said that ASIC was updating its responsible lending guidance, and as part of its consultation, public hearings would be held to “robustly test some of the issues and views that have been raised in submissions”.
This is a follow-up to ASIC’s consultation paper on updating its guidance on responsible lending, which was issued in mid-February 2019.
Interestingly, ASIC has discretion as to whether such hearings would take place privately or publicly. However the regulator is required to have regard to whether it is in the public interest for a hearing to take place in public.
In addition, ASIC also has power to summon witnesses and require the production of documents for the purposes of a public hearing. It may also refer to a court any questions of law arising at a hearing.
To date ASIC has hardly used it hearings powers but is does appear they intend to utilise these as an aspect of its renewed approach to enforcement in the wake of the Hayne Royal Commission.
We are embedding and expanding new supervisory approaches and promoting best practice and innovation in regulation – particularly through our Close & Continuous Monitoring program (or CCM) and our corporate governance review that is aimed at improving governance practices at the board level.
We are also implementing new and existing reforms and working towards our new obligations and responsibilities in response to the Royal Commission. This includes an expanded role for ASIC to become the primary conduct regulator in superannuation.
I hope they take into account the negative effects of “Responsible Lending” in light of the emerging new paradigm focussing on “well being” with, of course NZ leading the way – https://probonoaustralia.com.au/news/2019/06/new-zealands-well-being-budget-how-it-hopes-to-improve-peoples-lives/
So can you prove the implementation of so called “Responsible Lending” is better for consumers well being or is it another specious phrase that does the exact opposite of its stated intent given my street level experience of the emotion and health distress its causing?
AT the moment its “can’t make this month payment but can catch up next month? No worries we’ll sell your home so you won’t have to worry about it.”