The campaign, dubbed ‘Battle of Fairness’, will be launched on Monday 24 August and AIOFP executive director Peter Johnston has called on advisers to make contact with government officials to put forward views on the risk reforms.
“Now is an opportune time to commence an ’email bombardment’ of your local sitting Coalition member pointing out that these proposed changes are not in the best interests of consumers, the nation’s underinsurance dilemma and small business,” Mr Johnston wrote in a letter to members.
“We will supply you with the letter and email address to commence what we have colloquially termed the ‘Battle of fairness’ and encourage you and all your staff to get involved.”
Mr Johnston told members that the changes would not be legislated in the short term and defended his association’s militant response to the proposed reforms.
“Some members have asked why we are taking such an aggressive position with this issue, I suspect these members operate purely on a fee for service basis. This is of course understandable from their perspective, but for the far majority of advisers who operate on a different business model our campaign is critically important,” he wrote.
“From a political lobbying position, we are the only Association left with the political capital and the will to fight the big end of town”.
The other ‘forgotten’ potential casualties of the proposed changes are consumers, who either will not get advice or will be sold flawed online or telemarketing policies that may not deliver what is needed due to underwriting deficiencies, Mr Johnston said.
While not a member of AIOFP I fully support their efforts with this campaign and have already written to one senator and plan to write to others.
I also agree that the other associations supposedly representing Risk Advisers have capitulated and only have one question of them, why?
Thank you Peter Johnston and AIOFP for this very important campaign. I had already seen my local Federal member, (coalition) who appeared to be quite sympathetic to our opposition to most of the LIF reform proposal. I look forward to also sending him a copy of the letter, just so he remembers and knows that we are still outraged by the unfairness proposed to be forced on us.