3.6 Regulators

Twin peaks

Recommendation 6.1 – Retain twin peaks

The ‘twin peaks’ model of financial regulation should be retained.

ASIC’s enforcement practices

Recommendation 6.2 – ASIC’s approach to enforcement

ASIC should adopt an approach to enforcement that:

  • takes, as its starting point, the question of whether a court should determine the consequences of a contravention;
  • recognises that infringement notices should principally be used in respect of administrative failings by entities, will rarely be appropriate for provisions that require an evaluative judgment and, beyond purely administrative failings, will rarely be an appropriate enforcement tool where the infringing party is a large corporation;
  • recognises the relevance and importance of general and specific deterrence in deciding whether to accept an enforceable undertaking, and the utility in obtaining admissions in enforceable undertakings; and
  • separates, as much as possible, enforcement staff from non-enforcement related contact with regulated entities.

Superannuation: Conduct regulation

Recommendation 6.3 – General principles for co-regulation

The roles of APRA and ASIC in relation to superannuation should be adjusted to accord with the general principles that:

  • APRA, as the prudential regulator for superannuation, is responsible for establishing and enforcing Prudential Standards and practices designed to ensure that, under all reasonable circumstances, financial promises made by superannuation entities APRA supervises are met within a stable, efficient and competitive financial system; and
  • as the conduct and disclosure regulator, ASIC’s role in superannuation primarily concerns the relationship between RSE licensees and individual consumers.

Effect should be given to these principles by taking the steps described in Recommendations 6.4 and 6.5.

Recommendation 6.4 – ASIC as conduct regulator

Without limiting any powers APRA currently has under the SIS Act, ASIC should be given the power to enforce all provisions in the SIS Act that are, or will become, civil penalty provisions or otherwise give rise to a cause of action against an RSE licensee or director for conduct that may harm a consumer. There should be co‑regulation by APRA and ASIC of these provisions.

Recommendation 6.5 – APRA to retain functions

APRA should retain its current functions, including responsibility for the licensing and supervision of RSE licensees and the powers and functions that come with it, including any power to issue directions that APRA presently has or is to be given.

The BEAR: Co-regulation

Recommendation 6.6 – Joint administration of the BEAR

ASIC and APRA should jointly administer the BEAR. ASIC should be charged with overseeing those parts of Divisions 1, 2 and 3 of Part IIAA of the Banking Act that concern consumer protection and market conduct matters. APRA should be charged with overseeing the prudential aspects of Part IIAA.

Recommendation 6.7 – Statutory amendments

The obligations in sections 37C and 37CA of the Banking Act should be amended to make clear that an ADI and accountable person must deal with APRA and ASIC (as the case may be) in an open, constructive and co-operative way. Practical amendments should be made to provisions such as section 37K and section 37G(1) so as to facilitate joint administration.

Recommendation 6.8 – Extending the BEAR

Over time, provisions modelled on the BEAR should be extended to all APRA-regulated financial services institutions. APRA and ASIC should jointly administer those new provisions.

Co-ordination and information sharing

Recommendation 6.9 – Statutory obligation to co-operate

The law should be amended to oblige each of APRA and ASIC to:

  • co-operate with the other;
  • share information to the maximum extent practicable; and
  • notify the other whenever it forms the belief that a breach in respect of which the other has enforcement responsibility may have occurred.

Recommendation 6.10 – Co-operation memorandum

ASIC and APRA should prepare and maintain a joint memorandum setting out how they intend to comply with their statutory obligation to co-operate.

The memorandum should be reviewed biennially and each of ASIC and APRA should report each year on the operation of and steps taken under it in its annual report.


Recommendation 6.11 – Formalising meeting procedure

The ASIC Act should be amended to include provisions substantially similar to those set out in sections 27–32 of the APRA Act – dealing with the times and places of Commissioner meetings, the quorum required, who is to preside, how voting is to occur and the passing of resolutions without meetings.

Recommendation 6.12 – Application of the BEAR to regulators

In a manner agreed with the external oversight body (the establishment of which is the subject of Recommendation 6.14 below) each of APRA and ASIC should internally formulate and apply to its own management accountability principles of the kind established by the BEAR.

Recommendation 6.13 – Regular capability reviews

APRA and ASIC should each be subject to at least quadrennial capability reviews. A capability review should be undertaken for APRA as soon as is reasonably practicable.


Recommendation 6.14 – A new oversight authority

A new oversight authority for APRA and ASIC, independent of Government, should be established by legislation to assess the effectiveness of each regulator in discharging its functions and meeting its statutory objects.

The authority should be comprised of three part-time members and staffed by a permanent secretariat.

It should be required to report to the Minister in respect of each regulator at least biennially.