Mr. William Prasifka:

If we look at the grounds on which the Financial Services Ombudsman can uphold the complaint, it is on the basis of legal principles. There is also a wider remit in terms of upholding complaints. We do not adjudicate on the basis of legal technicality. That is provided for in the Act, which also provides we can uphold a complaint if the conduct complained of was in accordance with law or established regulatory practice but was otherwise unreasonable, unjust, oppressive or improperly discriminatory in its application to the complainant. We have always taken that to mean we have a more broader equitable jurisdiction in terms of deciding complaints. This analysis is also reflected in the consumer protection code, which requires the provider to get to know the customer and give the customer suitable products. This is a more equitable type of jurisdiction. We have a more equitable jurisdiction in deciding complaints but Deputy Boyd Barrett asked a different question about us advising the Central Bank and the Government about broader issues.

Properly working, the Financial Services Ombudsman could be part of the early warning system of the financial services sector. Many issues first emerge in terms of the Government framework with us. That is why we have an open relationship with the Central Bank and we bring it to the attention of the Central Bank when we feel it appropriate.