Executive director of the Financial Services Commission (FSC) Lieutenant Colonel Keron Burrell has defended the regulator’s consultation process for proposed insurance fee increases, rejecting claims by the Insurance Association of Jamaica (IAJ) that the industry was not adequately engaged before the matter was brought to Parliament.

Burrell also took direct aim at IAJ Executive Director Everton McFarlane. Arguing that the fee review did not originate under his leadership but was one of several long-standing issues inherited from McFarlane when he took over the regulator, Burrell suggested the former FSC executive director should “look in the mirror”.

The comments came during Thursday’s virtual sitting of the Senate’s Regulations Committee, where Burrell countered recent criticisms from the IAJ that insurers had not been meaningfully consulted on the proposed fee increases and were not provided with sufficient information to properly assess the changes.

Instead, Burrell insisted that the consultation process stretched back nearly two years and extended well beyond the formal consultation period.

“September 5, 2023, we would have consulted with the industry, and we got back comments after that. We gave them 30 days, but of course, we were unable to increase it. During that period, we consulted, and there was a meaningful dialogue and discussion, and that discussion continues up to today,” Burrell told senators.

He said the discussions covered not only the proposed fees but also a range of broader issues raised by industry stakeholders, including insurance penetration rates, product approvals and regulatory reforms.

According to Burrell, concerns raised by insurers about the timing of the increases were not new and had been part of ongoing discussions with the regulator for years.

“At the time, which was 2023, it was asked, ‘We just had a hurricane season why do you want it now? And I said, ‘The thing is we have a hurricane season every year; and secondly, I have to beef up as well as it concerns catastrophe in terms of the persons that have assessments, models, after catastrophe, after a big natural event; and what actually happens to the regulators’,” he expressed.

The consultation process has become one of the most contentious aspects of the proposed fee increases after McFarlane publicly criticised what he described as shortcomings in communication between the FSC and the industry.

Burrell, however, dismissed suggestions that insurers were blindsided by the proposals, telling senators that engagement with industry players has been extensive and continuous.

“We had a consultation period of 30 days, and that period, that consultation was pretty wide. It included the associations and the president and the executive and so on. Secondly, it included the institutions itself, and of course, we also sent it to the ministries and so on and so forth. We have met with and spoken to several members of the sector, more times than I can count, to include last week,” he said.

The sharpest moment of the exchange came when Burrell addressed McFarlane’s criticism directly.

McFarlane, who now heads the IAJ, previously served as executive director of the FSC before Burrell assumed leadership of the body. Burrell suggested that this history made the criticism difficult to understand, given that the fee review process predated his tenure.

“I said to Everton, ‘Everton, how could you have that in the paper? Recall you are the past head of the FSC. You passed this fire to me. This fee increase, I never started it. It was something you handed. If you’re talking about consultation, I think the best thing to do was to look in the mirror and ask yourself, why did I do this?’ I think there’s a 100 per cent consultation with the executive director of the IAJ,” Burrell said.

He also suggested that some concerns raised by insurers involve legislative and policy matters that extend beyond the FSC’s direct authority, including efforts to modernise laws and regulations governing the sector.

Despite the public disagreement, Burrell indicated that communication between the regulator and industry representatives remains active.

“I think that the correspondence, the discussion, the consultations have been very fruitful, and I’m kind of understanding where they are,” he said.

The dispute comes as the FSC seeks parliamentary approval for its first comprehensive revision of insurance fees since 2008. The commission is arguing that the regulator’s resources have failed to keep pace with the rapid growth of an industry whose assets have expanded from roughly $170 billion to more than $746 billion over the period.