Platinum Members

Platinum Members


Gold Members

Gold Members


Events Booking - Mini Calendar

January   2021
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Who's Online

We have 24 guests and no members online

Events Booking - Upcoming events

There are no up-coming events
President's Message 12/2019

President's Message 12/2019

I cannot believe that we are at the end of 2019 already. From my side it has been an amazing journey with the institute this year as President. ....

Read More

Membership 2020

Membership 2020

New membership structures and value propositions for 2020. Apply or upgrade your membership as soon as possible to prevent you from loosing out ...

Read More

Communicator - Q2 2020

Communicator - Q2 2020

The Protection of Personal Information Act 4 of 2013 (POPI) has now come into effect and it is important that South Africa businesses adhere to the new regulations.

Continue reading



The IISA has put together a variety of courses in insurance. These courses will focus on Qualification Support for key insurance modules,

More Info

IING Events Calendar 2017


24 February

RE1/RE5 Workshop

23 March


30 March

Presidents' Inauguration Breakfast

10 May

Education Workshop

23 May

Presidents’ Golf Day

14 June

RE1/2 Workshop

27 June

Tenpin Bowling Evening

6 July

Education Workshop (Motor Forum)

18 July

Whisky Evening (Special Invitation)

18 August

GoKart Day

August - TBC

SASRIA Training

23 August

Education Workshop (Provisional)

7 September

Ladies Day Event

13 September

RE1/RE5 Workshop


Ladies Golf Day (Provisional)

26 October

Year End Function

Committee Meetings: 3rd Friday of Every Month

Event dates are subject to change without prior notice due to unforseen circumstances.

Please check back regularly.

By Natasjha du Plessis

The seventh IING RE training was held on 24 February 2017 at the Santam offices in Menlyn. Fatima Maharaj from Learnon provided the training of the 35 delegates who attended the session. The participants received information and tips that will enable them to successful put this challenge behind them.

Below are a few essential exam pointers:

  • Remember to stay calm when writing the exam
  • Read the questions from beginning to end
  • Pay attention to the double negative questions

The IING regard education as one of the fundamental pillars in their core values. We educate members to focus on uplifting and maintaining the professional standard of knowledge within the industry.

At the IING we commit in presenting at least two RE training sessions per year. Keep an eye out for the next IING RE training invitation planned for 14 July 2017.

Best wishes to all delegates who will be writing their exams soon. May you reap the success of your efforts.

Source www.risk.net

Financial institutions face a range of operational challenges in 2017


In a series of interviews that took place in November and December 2016, Risk.net spoke to chief risk officers, heads of operational risk and other op risk practitioners at financial services firms, including banks, insurers, and asset managers. Based on the op risk concerns most frequently selected by those practitioners, we present our ranking of the top 5 operational risks for 2017.

#1: Cyber risk and data security

An overwhelming number of risk managers ranked the threat from cyber-attacks as their top operational risk for 2017 – the second year in a row it has topped the rankings, this year by an even larger margin. And this is no surprise as the threat from cyber-attacks is not only growing but also mutating into new and insidious forms, say risk practitioners.

Source www.mckinsey.com
by Shital Chheda, Ewan Duncan, and Stefan Roggenhofer

The benefits of improved customer experience can be fleeting unless changes to supporting back-end operations are made as well. Digital is reshaping customer experience in almost every sector. Digital first attackers are entering markets with radically new offers, disrupting the ways that companies and customers interact and setting a high bar for simplicity, personalization, and interactivity.

To not only stay in the game but capture new sources of value, incumbents will need to reinvent their customer experience. That begins with bringing in data and analytics-based insights about what matters to customers and how best to deliver it to them. Some companies fail to capture the full benefits of their improvement efforts because they concentrate on optimizing individual touchpoints rather than tackling the customer experience as customers experience it—a complete journey that cuts across multiple functions and channels.

The other imperative for companies is to tie the reinvented customer experience to their operations explicitly. If they focus only on the front-end experience and don’t change the back-end operations that support it, the new experience is unlikely to be sustainable. Changes will be needed in both underlying processes, and the way employees work.

Enhancing the customer experience can bring rich rewards. Across industries, satisfied customers spend more and stay more loyal over time. In banking, customers are seven times more likely to increase their deposits and twice as likely to open an additional account if they rate a bank as excellent (with a customer-satisfaction score of nine or ten out of ten) rather than average (six to eight out of ten). Similarly, pay-TV customers who rate their provider as excellent tend to stay with it for up to twice as long as they would a provider they rate as average or below.

Source www.mckinsey.com

On the 30th of March, at the Protea Fire and Ice Hotel in Menlyn, we kicked off the 2017 calendar by welcoming our new IING president, Anton Coertze from Santam Insurance. It was an intimate event joined by members, insurers, and suppliers.


 Anton introduced his 2017 team and committee members to the guests: 

Anton Coertzen – President (Santam)

Natalie Graham – Deputy President (King Price)

Marius de Bruyn – Vice President (Garagesure)

Wynand Louw – Treasurer (afsonline)

Karen Vincent – Secretary (HRM Brokers)

Anton Coertze is well known within the industry. He is currently working for Santam and recently moved over from Mutual and Federal.

 After the official handover from our past president Marieta Steyn, Anton touched on the topic of change, meaning change within the industry and change within the IING. We will be focusing on providing training and support to our members on the pending changes to RDR, CPD points, and RE training.  The goal is to provide locally based training, thus minimizing travel to Johannesburg to keep yourself informed.

David Harpur from IISA was our guest speaker on the morning. 

David gave us an overview of the current hot topics in the industry, as well as the IISA’s plans for the rest of 2017.  The IING is looking forward to some collaborated events and training between the IISA and IING.

  (Mike Pierce, Anton Coertzen, Marieta Steyn and David Harper)

 (Anton Coertzer and Marieta Steyn)

 (Anton Coertzen and Natalie Graham)

A warm thank you to everyone who joined us on this lovely event to meet our new president.

Robin Sharma said, “Change is hard at first, messy in the middle, but gorgeous at the end.”

It gives me pleasure in writing to you as the new President of the IING.

We know well that change is constant. Some of us embrace it, but for some of us, it takes time to understand it. Then some of us try hard in resisting possible change. The cycles of change management are well documented – the reality is that change is coming.

At the 2016 FIA Broker Summit, the theme was “broker, innovator, disruptor.” They discussed innovation in the industry and whom and what will be the disruptors in our market. Then the 2016 IISA Conference was themed “Business Unusual.” Again the industry very well realized that what worked for us a couple of years ago would simply just not be good enough going forward.

The themes of change are continuing in 2017 with the broker summit on “Survive OR Thrive” and in July the IISA Conference will focus on “Disrupt, debate, deliver.” I guess, to paraphrase Robin Sharma’s quote, that we are now in the middle of change which is hard and messy.

So how do we get to the “gorgeous” part then? In life, one should not try and focus on a thousand different things, but rather have structured focus.

In our industry, we also need to understand that there are basics. What are these basics? If someone asked me this, I would argue that giving good and proper advice to clients would be at the top of my list. But we are not just advisors – we are “risk advisors.” Our clients face many risks – we have old, known risks and then we have new risks coming fast and furiously. What about internet fragmentation where cyber crime and cyber espionage have increased over the last couple of years? And what about data risks where data integrity may become a problem for insurance companies? Companies collect data from customers – but what do you do when the client is incentivized to manipulate the data?

It is normal for the human race to steer away from the unknown. The problem we have is that our clients will face all these new risks and we need to be geared and ready to assist them.

The IING will be focusing the need to assist and facilitate on the education front for our members. We also need to focus on growing our member base. If we want to facilitate training sessions we need numbers. Thus the two focus areas walk hand in hand with each other.

Please allow me to thank Marieta, our former president, and the previous committee for the good work done. We will be tasked to continue this work.

Lastly, in the words of Rick Godwin: “One reason people resist change is because they focus on what they have to give up, instead of what they have to gain.” Let us all grab the opportunity of gaining knowledge and being trusted risk advisors for all our clients.

Anton Coertze

At the end of my term as President, I cannot help but reflect back to the highlights and the success we have achieved as an Insurance Institute. What an honour it has been to lead the Institute of Northern Gauteng for the past two years. We have grown as an Institute not only by our membership numbers but through the values we have established and live by in the industry.

Our collaboration with the IISA was one of the highlights during this period. We have successfully presented the liability workshop and motor insurance - best practice session. We have listened to our members and hosted several training sessions on RE, Sasria, and other related topics.

I am looking forward to this year’s events. We have truly connected with our members through our social and sports events. We hosted our second Ladies’ Golf Day, thankful for the opportunity to connect with ‘women in the financial services industry.' The annual President’s Golf Day was and will always be one of the highlights of the year. We have successfully hosted our first CEO Whiskey Tasting evening during 2016. The annual Tenpin Bowling evening was also well received.

Our Communicator had a revamp, and I am proud of what we achieved. Our social media platforms have grown nicely. The number of likes, shares, and tweets increased on Facebook and Twitter. Our website hits improved, proof of the support the Insurance Institute received.

During my term, the committee decided to support two charity organisations, Jacaranda Children’s Home, and Hospice. We have great admiration for the work both of these charities do and the difference they make in people’s lives. We have also supported the Sinoville Crisis Centre during the 2016 Ladies’ Day event.

On a personal note, I want to thank all individuals who contributed to the success of the Insurance Institute of Northern Gauteng over the years.

Thank you to my family, friends, and colleagues for your support during my presidency.

I would like to congratulate the newly elected president, Anton Coertze, and the 2017 committee. May you succeed in everything that you put your mind too and fulfill the needs of our members.

Be safe and enjoy every moment.

Marieta Steyn

Source www.bcgperspectives.com

by Matteo Coppola and Lorenzo Fantini

Long an afterthought for most companies, compliance risk management—in financial services generally, and in the insurance industry specifically—is becoming a strategic function at the core of multiple business processes as diverse as new-product development and financial reporting. A comprehensive study by BCG of chief compliance officers (CCOs) and business executives in the insurance industry shows that this trend is set to continue.

Following the 2008 financial crisis, compliance in banking underwent a fundamental transformation as lawmakers and regulators in North America and Europe placed a host of new requirements on financial institutions. Regulatory activity today, especially in Europe, suggests that the insurance industry is facing a similar situation. Many companies view increasing compliance requirements as simply another burden on an already heavily regulated sector. Smart insurers, however, see opportunities to differentiate themselves with customers and consumers and even to establish a competitive advantage.

Our study of compliance in the insurance industry assessed current risks, the state of governance and organization in insurance companies, and today’s compliance processes and methodologies. In this article, we summarize our findings, analyze the shifting compliance environment, and consider what that shift means for the insurance industry.

The Rising Importance of Compliance

A number of factors are compelling compliance risk management from backwater to boardroom:

  • An evolving business environment that requires increasing attention to such issues as customer and data protection and privacy.
  • A rising regulatory wave that is expected to build over the next two to three years and increase requirements in some jurisdictions, many of which focus on compliance. (See Exhibit 1.)


  • Emerging risks, such as data protection and the inadvertent financing of terrorism, that insurers must manage.
  • Growing awareness by consumers of their rights as insureds and greater regulatory focus on company conduct and risk culture, including closer scrutiny of behaviors, customer outcomes, and the value delivered to customers.
  • Increasing sanctions for noncompliance, following the precedent set in banking, in which fines, settlements, and redress costs over the past five years reached a cumulative total of approximately €200 billion.

But perhaps most important, new business models and strategic imperatives require more active management of compliance risks. For example, a growing focus on customer needs puts an emphasis on customer protection, including product design and transparency as well as distribution. Digital sales models raise new and more complex concerns over financial crime and buyer verification. And the increasing use of big data demands that privacy and data protection requirements be addressed for an ever-growing body of information.

These and other developments necessitate a compliance function that is much more active, sophisticated, and robust than the ones that most insurers currently have.

BCG’s Compliance Risk Assessment

Our study consisted of in-depth interviews with CCOs and other senior managers at 17 insurers, including global and regional companies, in eight countries. Among other things, we asked these executives to rank the importance of various risks today. (See Exhibit 2.) Client and data protection and financial crime emerged as the two most critical risk categories in our sample for both global and regional players, with an average ranking of 3.0 on a scale of 0 to 5. Market integrity and professional ethics were less relevant, with average rankings of 2.5 and 2.4, respectively.


Within the category of client data and protection, “mis-selling” and fiduciary risk, privacy and data protection, and product adequacy and disclosure are the most critical risks. “My sentiment is that the industry is not doing a good job in screening customer data; the risk is high,” said one senior executive. “Sales force mis-selling is a critical risk for our group, and it will be even more critical in Europe with MiFID II [the European Union’s Markets in Financial Instruments Directive],” said another.

Within financial crime, anti-money-laundering (AML) risks are the most critical. We expect the repercussions of financial crime (especially AML and related sanctions) to become an even more significant factor, as the banking industry has already experienced. As one member of our panel put it, “Money-laundering risk must be tackled in a tailored way, region by region, to be effective while minimizing costs.”

Where Does the Compliance Function Fit?

Compliance risks should be managed by the part of the organization that takes risks. What’s more, that management is inherently ineffective without the strong involvement of business functions. Mitigation of compliance risks is primarily a frontline responsibility. Thus, company executives and their staffs are the first line of defense against poor or inadequate risk management.

The compliance function, along with other control functions, should support business by providing standards, methodologies, and policies. Compliance is the second line of defense, and, as such, it should coordinate risk assessments and guide designing controls and defining mitigating actions.

The audit function is the third line of defense. It should provide independent assurance about the adequacy of the framework for compliance risk management.

Compliance Governance and Organization

The compliance function itself should have the following key elements:

  • A strong organizational structure that combines content specialization and operational efficiency, typically including departments that focus on the type of risk (such as financial crime and customer protection) and activities across various risks (such as methodologies, monitoring and controls, and reporting).
  • Independent reporting lines that safeguard the independence of the CCO. Companies use different CCO reporting models today (to the CEO, to general counsel, or to the chief risk officer, for example), but in all cases, direct access to the board of directors should be guaranteed.
  • A clear relationship between group-wide and local activities. Local CCOs should have a strong and codified functional reporting line to the group CCO, who should provide significant input on HR decisions (such as hiring, termination, and promotions) and the budgets of local CCOs.
  • An appropriate mix of competencies. Compliance’s traditional focus on legal skills, which remain critical to understanding regulations, should be complemented with business knowledge and risk management skills to work with business personnel to manage compliance risks.
  • Adequate sizing. Group-wide compliance functions currently range from 10 to 20 full-time-equivalent (FTE) employees for regional insurers and from 25 to 35 FTEs for global organizations, depending on overall scale. Local compliance functions must be able to adequately cover all principal risks at the local level and all core cross-risk activities, such as risk assessments, controls, and reporting.

To make sure that roles and responsibilities are clearly delineated, the compliance function’s mandate and scope should be differentiated from those of the legal and operational risk functions. About compliance risks, the legal department should provide advice on current and new regulations, as well as judiciary practices. The operational risk function should maintain oversight of nonfinancial risks, focusing on internal processes and procedures, people, and systems; identifying and measuring risks; and applying a common approach across all functions, including compliance. Compliance should take the lead on more specialized activities, such as supporting the business function on definition policies regarding controls, taking mitigating actions, and supporting the operational risk function on the qualitative element of risk assessments. Splitting responsibilities between the operational risk and compliance functions on the sole basis of a risk taxonomy definition, as discussed in the following section, has proven difficult for many companies because implementing differences in day-to-day activities can result in inconsistent methodologies, processes, and outcomes for similar risks.

Compliance Processes and Methodologies

At the base of any compliance methodology, insurers must establish a structured risk taxonomy that is integrated with operational risks. If compliance risks cannot be clearly described, they cannot be measured, managed with appropriate mitigating actions, or reported within the organization in a consistent and coherent manner. Our survey findings suggest that while most insurers identify compliance risks at both the group-wide and local levels, few align their compliance risk taxonomies with operational risks. As the CCO of one regional insurer told us, “We manage data privacy, and risk management manages data protection separately, despite great similarities between them.” The result is a potential duplication of processes and, possibly, different assessments of risks that are similar or even identical to one another.

Risk assessments that prioritize risks by objective evidence, expert opinions, and business feedback are the first pillar of comprehensive compliance risk management. They provide a clear view of the risks and the processes that the risks threaten. In our experience, however, too many insurers view them as “gap assessments” focused only on regulatory requirements.

Risk assessments should be used to measure the risks underlying each regulation and should be based on an in-depth understanding of each insurer’s business model. They should provide clear guidance on where to focus remedial actions and controls. The board of directors, executive managers, and business functions should be actively involved, and the compliance function should provide support and guidance regarding methodologies.

Most insurers today perform traditional bottom-up assessments, which are time-consuming exercises, especially when they need to be completed for multiple business units, legal entities, and processes affected by a broad set of regulations. The bottom-up approach typically does not prioritize risks before the assessment, so the subsequent efforts neither focus on the most significant risks nor facilitate executive decisions on risk mitigation.

In a top-down risk assessment, however, CCOs engage boards and top management to identify and prioritize the most important risks arising from current and new regulations with a very simple and high-level risk taxonomy that includes no more than 20 risks. Together, they determine the business processes in which these risks are particularly relevant and discuss the impact of new strategic initiatives on the compliance risk profile.

Not only do top-down assessments require less time and effort, but they also serve as a much more effective tool with which insurers can:

  • Prioritize efforts on a risk-based approach, as has been suggested by many regulations (for example, the new AML Directive IV in Europe), so that these risks can be the subject of more traditional and detailed bottom-up assessments.
  • Encourage the board of directors and executive managers to become involved and to view compliance as a business imperative.
  • Link compliance more closely to company strategy.
  • Adopt a forward-looking perspective to assess not only current risks but also risks that may emerge within the timeframe of the planning strategy.
  • Gain an external perspective on emerging risks and trends through industry intelligence, which cannot be captured internally.

More advanced insurers are also developing so-called compliance risk appetite frameworks that embed shareholders’ appetite for compliance risks into their risk assessments. The boards of these insurers, supported by the CCO, set tolerance limits for compliance risks that are linked to the results of compliance risk assessments. The CCO of a global insurer describes his company’s approach this way: “We draw a risk map with the inherent risk on one axis and the controls environment on the other axis, which gives us an excellent view of the positions of the different risks. Then we compare the positioning of each risk against our risk appetite framework to identify priorities and the risks to focus on.”

Such companies are enforcing their “zero appetite” philosophy for noncompliance with regulations by establishing a clear appetite for the risks related to the regulations. Since compliance risk levels can never be reduced to zero, understanding that such risks can only be mitigated helps to set priorities and maximizes the efficacy and efficiency of mitigating actions.

For most insurance companies, managing compliance risks means having a solid controls system in place. But effectiveness is often equated with comprehensiveness, when in fact, the actual effectiveness of such systems depends on prioritizing and focusing on the critical risks, employing a lean and efficient design, and positioning the controls upstream in business processes to avoid costly loops and duplications. The experience of the banking industry is instructive in this regard. In the wake of the 2008 meltdown, controls and FTEs exploded, along with the investments required to manage them—but increases in compliance levels did not necessarily follow.

Insurers should rigorously review their controls framework, updating guidelines and policies, understanding risk factors, reviewing controls objectives and risk indicators, and rationalizing controls activities. We have developed a framework of best practices based on our study. (See Exhibit 3.) One of the key concepts is to link the strength and number of controls to the level of residual risk measured by the risk assessments so that controls are focused on the areas in which the perceived residual risk is significant.


Insurers can help top executives and members of the board to focus on and understand risk management by synthesizing the overall risk profile into a few figures—the key risk indicators (KRIs) of compliance. The most difficult challenge is to merge different metrics and qualitative information into a KRI number. The first step is to define the “risk tree,” which encompasses all the drivers that contribute to the risk indicator. Once the risk tree is defined and agreed upon by the board and top management, the compliance function can find an appropriate way to measure and compare each of the drivers and then build the overall indicator into a useful reporting tool.

Levers for Competitive Advantage

Managing compliance risks goes beyond controls and reporting. Our study highlighted three strategic actions that companies should take to transform compliance from a burden into a source of competitive advantage.

Involve the board. Companies should actively help boards of directors to understand compliance risks and their impact better. At more than 75% of the insurers that we interviewed, board committees (such as risk, control, and audit) meet at least quarterly to discuss compliance topics. CCOs, however, are invited to these committee meetings only on an ad hoc basis to discuss current issues or to present periodic reports. Very few CCOs are actively involved in strategic discussions of compliance risk profile and regulatory strategy.

Changing this approach is not an easy task. CCOs highlighted several common issues that need to be addressed, including limited board knowledge of compliance topics, the difficulty of translating technical compliance concepts into simple messages that focus on taking action, and uncertainty about the type of information to be reported at the board level. To handle these issues, some leading companies are launching training programs for board members, including self-assessments and regulatory inductions. Such sessions are already standard in banking.

Embed compliance in insurers’ strategic-planning processes. Forward-looking management of compliance is essential for insurers, but only about 15% of insurers raise compliance risk management to the level of strategic planning. These tend to be the companies with top-down risk assessment processes in place. Such assessments help to embed compliance thinking into the strategy of the company and the main strategic initiatives launched by the businesses. For example, the European Union’s Insurance Distribution Directive II is bringing fundamental changes to the relationship between insurers and their intermediaries and requiring new levels of information disclosure to customers, both of which raise key strategic questions. A best-practice compliance risk management approach would incorporate the expected changes from the new regulations into the distribution strategy and use new information requirements as the basis for developing innovative products targeting specific customers with focused marketing campaigns.

Make the necessary investments. Insurers need to allocate the required budget to ensure that their compliance risk management framework stays current with regulatory requirements and to integrate compliance into business strategy. CCOs outlined three main areas for investment:

  • Reviews of current operating models, including the roles of, and information exchange among, control functions and compliance processes to ensure business engagement and compliance function involvement
  • Better design of risk dashboards and risk reporting, an increasingly common request from boards of directors
  • Training programs for compliance officers and business executives that address methodologies, processes, and business cases to build the necessary understanding of compliance risks

A Roadmap for Insurers

Each insurance company starts with different compliance capabilities, processes, and methodologies. And each will need to contend with varying degrees of complexity, depending on the insurer’s size, footprint, and business mix. All companies need to assess their readiness for upcoming challenges and build more robust models if required. Most will benefit from taking the following steps:

  • Perform a rapid health check to benchmark a starting point on peers and regulatory expectations on a predefined set of dimensions.
  • Launch compliance risk assessments and mitigation programs, focusing on the most critical risks and taking a strategic and forward-looking view.
  • Revise compliance governance to reflect priority risks and move toward a more business-oriented approach, making compliance governance “regulator ready.”
  • Strengthen holding company and local compliance functions, ensuring that the right organization, activities, sizing, and competencies are in place.
  • Conduct an end-to-end review of the controls framework with a risk-based approach, including policies and procedures, risk factors, controls objectives, and control activities.
  • Launch ad hoc training programs to apply compliance risk management to real business cases, with relevant training for boards of directors, business management, and the compliance function.

 Regulatory changes and emerging business models are transforming compliance risk management from a formal exercise to a top concern for insurers. Awareness of compliance risks has risen dramatically, and as our study shows, many companies have already started the journey toward structured, business-driven, and forward-looking compliance risk management practices. There is still significant work to be done. Those that tackle the challenges and move quickly to establish best practices in their organizations will reap the rewards of leadership and competitive advantage.

Source www.bcgperspectives.com

Source RiskAfrica

By Dr. Adrian Saville, chief strategist at Citadel

At midnight on Thursday, President Jacob Zuma announced the details of a widely anticipated cabinet reshuffle. Zuma made twenty changes to his administration. Without question, though, the most significant – and concerning – is the removal of the respected and regarded Minister of Finance Pravin Gordhan and Deputy Minister of Finance Mcebisi Jonas.

Notwithstanding internal opposition from among the top six members of the ANC and its alliance partner, the South African Communist Party (SACP), eight other cabinet members were also shuffled. The immediate market reaction was palpable, with the rand moving from R12.80 to the US dollar on Thursday evening to trade as high as R13.60 to the US dollar by early Friday morning.

Zuma’s actions reek of desperation

Gordhan, who was recalled from an international roadshow at the start of the week, has been replaced by Home Affairs Minister Malusi Gigaba. Gigaba is a former ANC youth league leader and has served in parliament and cabinet under former President Thabo Mbeki and Zuma. He has no financial or business experience. Put bluntly, confidence in Gigaba’s leadership at the National Treasury is likely to be low given his insipid performance as minister of public enterprises and the visa fiasco that transpired under him as minister of home affairs. He is widely regarded to be a Zuma loyalist. As such, his appointment represents a direct risk to the institutional strength and fabric of the National Treasury and the maintenance of the fiscal discipline that is Gordhan’s hallmark.

Less surprising is the appointment of Sfiso Buthelezi who has been widely touted as a likely replacement for either Gordhan or – as is the case – Jonas. Buthelezi is a seasoned politician, qualified economist and comes with business experience that includes having served as chief operations officer and director of the Makana Investment Corporation – an investment vehicle for ex-political prisoners, particularly those from Robben Island.

There can be no avoiding the observation that Zuma’s actions reek of desperation. Gigaba is South Africa’s fourth finance minister in 15 months, and he is appointed days ahead of the decision to be announced by rating’s agency Moody’s in the first week of April. However, of the three big agencies, Standard and Poor’s has been the most vocal by far. Although their next decision is scheduled for early June, there is a chance that the agency’s announcement could be brought forward to an earlier date.

Shift in policy unlikely, but downgrade on the cards

Despite growing references to radical economic transformation, it is unlikely that we will see any substantial shift in policy in the near term. Still, the growing rhetoric and nature of Zuma’s actions are likely to lead rating agencies – and market actors – to regard South Africa as a greater investment risk at the end of this week than it was at the start. As a result, there is now a greater probability that Zuma’s actions will galvanise Standard and Poor’s into downgrading South Africa’s debt to sub-investment grade, perhaps as soon as mid-year.

Fallout expected

In terms of broader political implications, opposition parties are likely to call for a vote of no confidence and to work to put in place an impeachment motion. There is also a view that Zuma’s actions could prompt resignations from within cabinet and that this faction would enjoy the support of outspoken members of the SACP and perhaps galvanise Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa into action. ANC secretary general Mantashe has also commented in interviews about the disagreement and lack of support relating to the cabinet reshuffle. These developments will play out in their way, and experience suggests that those taking a stance on outcomes are, instead, likely to be met by surprise. Consider, by way of example, the overwhelmingly unanticipated political events that marked 2016, including Brexit and the Trump election.

In the immediate term, we should brace ourselves for currency weakness and market impacts in the form of the repricing of financial assets, including South African bonds and domestic banks. No doubt, there will also be a lot of noise to deal with as politicians deliberate, the country digests and markets decide.

Protecting and growing wealth doesn’t start with a question about “What’s the upside?” but rather “What’s the risk?”

In all of this, the merit of a sound investment philosophy and a disciplined process is reinforced, and we are reminded that protecting and growing wealth doesn’t start with a question about “What’s the upside?” but rather “What’s the risk?” As a consequence of the above uncertainties as well as others that we have anticipated – such as normalisation of interest rates in the United States, Trump’s more dramatic policy action and the likelihood of a ratings downgrade for South Africa – we have adopted a conservative stance in our portfolio construction and sought the greatest possible diversification to mitigate risk in each solution. For instance, we have a low allocation to credit in our money market, income and bond funds; we are short duration in our bond fund; we are underweight bonds in our house view and balanced fund; we are overweight hedge funds in our house view; we have overweight positions in protected equity in our house view and balanced fund; and, arguably most critically, we have held an underweight position on South African assets versus global assets.

Contrary to expectations, near-term impact of weak rand may be positive for economy; long-term effect undeniably negative

Perversely, the near-term impacts on the South African economy could be stimulatory through a weaker rand and more expansionary fiscal policy. The longer-term effects will be unequivocally negative, entrenching Zuma’s record of poor economic leadership. The most obvious long-term effects will come in the form of reduced personal income, held back by slower economic growth and eroded by higher consumer price inflation. Interest rates are also likely to move to a higher plane given the implications for South Africa’s credit ratings. Damaged business confidence will keep a lid on much-needed investment spending, and economic growth will remain muted. The implication, in turn, for urgently needed job creation by the private sector is unambiguously negative. Consequently, and bizarrely, the sought after radical economic transformation will become even harder to achieve under Zuma’s revised cabinet.

https://gallery.mailchimp.com/ab3bea28bcb7e79c93932e9f2/images/865dac0b-5af7-42c6-8e19-0a18f0275bf4.pngMOTOR INSURANCE – GLOBAL BEST PRACTICES FORUM

Tuesday, 24th May 2016
Time: 09:00 - 12:
Wingate Country Club, Norval Street, Moreleta Park

Please join us at the “Motor Insurance - Global Best Practices Forum” during which our presenters will explore the complexities of the dramatic processes and experiences with regard to fighting organised crime in the motor insurance industry. Effective underwriting practices and philosophies will highlight cost and expenditure issues.

You will be exposed to Corporate South Africa’s role in effecting changes in the Insurance Chain of clients, Member Companies, and Government Agencies.



Media Sponsors:


Dress Code: 

Business Smart-casual

Business card Draw:

Bring along your business cards to enter for prize draws.




Macro and Micro factors affecting the Insurance eco-system and customer experience, aligned to global trends.

Heidi Dias Head of Claims Transformation at Mutual & Federal, SAICB Board Member, SAIA Motor Committee Chairperson, International Keynote Presenter with 20 years experience, will enlighten us on the Macro and Micro factors affecting the Insurance eco-system and customer experience, aligned to global trends, and their adoption in the SA environment with cost and savings implications, with strategic guidance for sustaining broker/customer relationships.

The role of the SAICB, the significance and power of extensive and accurate data.

Garth De Klerk with twenty years insurance experience, formerly MD of an Underwriting Manager with shareholders, CGU, M&F, Santam and Hannover Re. In 2005 he established a full Insurance Licence in SA for COFACE, 2nd largest Credit Insurance Co globally, in which company he held the position of CEO/MD for 9 years. He is Presently CEO of the SA Insurance Crime Bureau. Garth will discuss the role of the SAICB, the significance and power of extensive and accurate data , and the types of crimes and syndicates, with sequential impact on costs - including case studies.

Client Care and Retention, Responsible Business Practice and Cost Containment.

Gerhard Genis head of Quality Management and Training with Santam. Holds numerous formal qualifications, including an MBA from Henley Business School (London) and with international experience with Santam’s presence in UK and Europe. Serves on various industry bodies, including the Board of Directors of the Ombudsman for Short term Insurance. In addition, Head of Claims Administration Services, Client Care and Retention, Responsible Business Practice and Cost Containment, in respect of all of which he will share his extensive practical knowledge and experience.


09h00 Registration & Refreshments
09h30 Welcome –Natalie Graham (IING)
09h35 Heidi Dias - ( Mutual and Federal) 
10h15 Garth De Klerk  - (SA Insurance Crime Bureau)
10h55 Prizes
11h00 Refreshments & Networking
11h45 Gerhard Genis - (Santam)
12h20 Final Closing -  Natalie Graham (IING)
Fees: Ex. VAT  
IING Member R 300.00  
Non Member R 350.00  

Every person wishing to attend is required to complete a registration form or access will be denied.

All cancellations are to be made in writing. Refer to declaration on registration form.




DATE:         Friday, 15th May 2015
TIME:           08:00 - 12:30
VENUE:       Santam Training Centre,
ADDRESS:  Menlyn Corporate Park, C/o Garsfontein Road & Corobay Avenue, Waterkloof Glen.





In Association with: https://gallery.mailchimp.com/ab3bea28bcb7e79c93932e9f2/images/c7af9494-7a72-4140-9d1e-44db3dd8f200.jpg


R.S.V.P. by 08 May 2015

Every person attending is required to complete a registration form or access will be denied





Please join us at the OVERVIEW OF MOTOR INSURANCE Forum during which our presenters will explore customer demands, fraudulent trends, analytics and in addition claims trends and Telematics.

You will be exposed to the Advantages and Disadvantages of Driver Training versus Telematics.

SAIA's Dawie Buys will share unique features and trends in the motor market. The transformation of claims handling in the future will also be explored.

Peter Todd will facilitate all the presentations and will analyse the views of our esteemed presenters and will pose questions to the presenters to create debate around the issues being presented.

Seats are limited. All delegates need to complete registration forms and seats will be allocated on a first paid first served basis, so don't delay and book today.


Facilitated by Wynand Louw



Registration & Refreshments


Welcome - David Harpur (IISA)


Sedick Isaacs (Zurich) - SA Motor Insurance Claims & Trends


Alan Eustice (Execuline) - Advantages & Disadvantages of Driver Training vs Telematics




Refreshment Break (40mins)


Dawie Buys (SAIA) - Sustainability of Motor Insurance going forward


Heidi Dias (Mutual & Federal) - Driving the Next Level of Customer Experience





To book, complete the registration form  and return to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.


Group Registration


Single Registration


Copyright © 2015 IISA, IING All rights reserved




We hereby give notice of the forthcoming Insurance Institute of Northern Gauteng’s AGM, to be held on Friday 23 May 2013 at 08h00 for 08h30 until 10h00 at Santam Menlyn Corporate Park Ground Floor - Training Room, Garstfontein Road, Pretoria.

All ordinary, professional and licensed members, as well as past and present business partners/sponsors, including all the role players in the insurance industry are kindly invited to this important event and are welcome to attend.


To give members who made insurance their profession the opportunity to directly participate and take ownership of the Insurance Institute, especially with the implementation of the future CPD - continuous professional development in mind.

This will also create a definite platform for all role players and sponsors to affectively become involved in networking in the insurance industry via IING’s education, social and sporting activities.


This is a once in a year opportunity to elect a new council of your choice for the 2014-2015 term. It will also give the incoming council enough time to pre-plan for their term of office.

Kindly therefore diaries 23 May 2014 as an IMPORTANT date.

ANNEXURES:- This can be downloaded from our website

Please RSVP before 16 May 2014 – This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.      




Are you a Fellow of the Insurance Institute of South Africa.

Then you are invited to this lunch in Pretoria.


2013 fellows lunch

We have received great feedback from the attendees:

"Dankie baie , en laat weet as daar weer werkwinkels is, ek sal julle enige tyd aanbeveel. Die Girls was baie "impress" en dit is die moeite werd deur en deur. "

"The workshop was so fabulous"


"My manager is so impressed about the feedback, if there is any training again please  inform  me so that my colleagues can register."

Big thank you to a great Facilitator Fatima Maharaj and her team and the members from IING for all the arrangements.

FSB Media Release:

Regulatory examination statistics

There are 11 weeks remaining to the 30 June 2012 deadline for Financial Service Providers to write their regulatory examinations. All candidates that have not yet written the examinations are requested to do so without delay to ensure that they are accommodated on their preferred dates and times.  The FSB is closely monitoring the registrations on an on-going basis and will take all necessary steps to ensure that no unnecessary disruptions are experienced in the provision of financial services.

Below please find a breakdown of the examination statistics.

The information below contains the statistics as at 11 April 2012:

RE 1

(Key individual for category I, II, IIA, III and IV)

Percentages for RE 1

RE 5

(Representatives of Categories I, II, IIA,

III and IV excluding representatives for subcategories 1.1 and 1.19)

Percentages for RE 5

Total number that must write the regulatory examinations

13 839


107 428


Total number of candidates that have written the regulatory examinations

9 150


63 368


Total number of candidates that have passed the regulatory examinations

6 734


41 318


Total number of candidates that must still write the regulatory examinations in order to meet the 30 June 2012 deadline

4 689


44 060