Star's article on RBC and liberalisation

I am puzzled with some of the statements in the article:

"The risk-based capital (RBC) framework, which came into force beginning this year, would also spur the insurers’ future earnings growth as it would allow them to be better capitalised"

How would better capitalised spur the insurers' future earnings growth? If an insurer was under-capitalised pre-RBC and now the capital is adequate, there should not be any impact on future earnings growth, or should it? I guess if an insurer has excess capital under RBC and they put it into better use by writing more businesses then there might be a positive impact on future earnings.

"For locally incorporated foreign insurers like Manulife Holdings Bhd and Allianz Malaysia Bhd, an analyst with an investment bank said the recent financial sector liberalisation measures was a boon to their business as it had allowed them to tie up with more than one bank to distribute products."

I thought prior to liberalisation, foreign banks could not tie up with foreign insurers in bancassurance. There was no limit on the number of bancassurance partners though. For example, foreign insurers could tie up with more than 1 local bank. This restriction is of course removed following liberalisation.

I stand to be corrected on the above.

Source: The Star