Speaking on the most recent episode of the ifa podcast, the CEO of the Association of Financial Advisers (AFA) offered some advice for those who have been most vocal in their opposition to the Quality of Advice Review.
“The Quality of Advice Review is the only game in town at the moment. This is the only way we are going to fix the problem that we all appreciate is in financial advice,” Mr Anderson said.
“Even our minister has described it as a hot mess. This is the only reform agenda that is in play that will achieve fundamental change. Yes, we could ask to tinker at the edges, but this is our one big opportunity to make fundamental change.”
He warned advisers not to let perfect be the enemy of the good. This, he said, would only serve to delay meaningful change and cause further damage to the industry.
“I look at the things that the Quality of Advice Review has recommended and think how many advisers would be prepared to give up the repeal of fee disclosure statements because of bickering from small factions of the advice sector,” Mr Anderson said.
“It’s nonsensical that we take this approach. We’ve got to give a united strong message about the reforms that we want to see happen. If we don’t grab this opportunity, then it might be four or five years down the track when adviser numbers have fallen further before we can ask again for some fundamental change to take place.”
He also addressed criticism that a lawyer like Michelle Levy was appointed to lead the review, citing the extent she went to consult with the industry.
“It’s not uncommon that a lawyer would be appointed to do a review like this, but what I’ve been particularly impressed with is that Michelle made herself so incredibly available. She went to advice practises, she talked to them, she talked to us extensively,” Mr Anderson said.
“Of course, the point that we would make is that she has been in financial services for a significant period of time. So, this is not new to her. The complexity of the regime is not new to her, and she comes to it with a legal mindset because ultimately what has to happen is the law has to change to achieve the outcomes that we want.”
Hear more from Mr Anderson here.
Phil, do the FPA and/or the AFA accept membership fees, and/or sponsorships or any other remuneration from product providers? This includes super funds, and unqualified call centre staff.
Serious question, because I am trying to understand your position on this. Good enough, is not good enough in this case.
Whilst I appreciate Phils perspective always, we, as an Industry Cohort have never had a united voice that is just ours, and this is what we need to rally around now. Accepting something that is sub-optimal, and that we can all see is going to cause even more unintended consequences in 4-5 years, is what we have always done, and its got us to where we are today a Hot Mess. Don’t accept mediocracy, and don’t accept the views of those who don’t understand Advice. Hayne & Levy, both lawyers who patently never understood advice, and working in Financial Services doesn’t mean you understand Advice Phil! . There are too many self interest group pushing this free for all line (FSC anyone) who have always pretend to be on our side, but really aren’t. I hope the new FAA doesn’t pander to the product providers, or worry about where their money is coming from, and instead stands for Advice. We’re going to need it if this goes through as it stands.
Good luck with that……………..
100% – the adviser voice has never been heard.