Professional advice will prevail, says industry pundit

While advisers are concerned by the idea that under the impending reforms product providers will re-enter the market, professionals sitting on the other side of the debate are offering words of reassurance.

According to Amara Haqqani, chief product and operations officer at Iress, “Professional advice given by financial advisers will always reign supreme”.

“Today’s announcement gives us a path, and there is so much more work to do to make advice easier to provide to more Australians. Making advice efficient is central to that. And I’m really glad that the government agrees,” Ms Haqqani said in a blog post last week.

Similarly, AMP’s chief executive Alexis George emphasised the words “frameworks” and “safeguards” when offering her thoughts on the government’s two-tiered advice plans.

She noted that this new tier of advice “must sit cohesively within the broader advice ecosystem”, including full-scale face-to-face advice, new digital solutions and other, more basic educational services already provided by super funds.

“This will ensure there is a clear, scaled advice pathway for consumers as their needs evolve”.

Ms George also touched on the most controversial part of the government’s announcement – the suggestion that employees of banks, superannuation funds and insurers should be known as “qualified advisers”.

In her response, she highlighted that AMP intends to “work proactively” with the government to ensure “the use of appropriate terminology” to enshrine the term financial adviser “as sufficiently different from the terminology of the proposed new-tier of advice provider”.

“We will assist government to finalise these important changes to help streamline the advice process as quickly possible, as we work to address the advice gap and support Australians facing cost of living pressures and those preparing for retirement”.

Naturally, however, advisers are sceptical of such declarations of support. Since the minister’s announcement last week, many have argued that those who should have advocated for them have let them down, and many expressed their distrust in the institutions, as well as the government.

One ifa reader took particular issue with the insurers: “For decades the life companies have spread the icing on thick when it came to telling advisers how "valued" they are, how we are their "partners" in distribution and how their business relied up on US. Haven't times changed! Now, they never mention us, don't advocate for us, don't support us in any meaningful way”.

Another reader wasn’t pleased with the associations: “The FAAA must go public with the mainstream media and sell it as an attack on small business and jobs. This is how other lobby groups do it.”

Overall, many shared the belief that Labor’s close relationship with the institutions played a part in the government’s final verdict on the Quality of Advice Review: “Anyone else get the feeling there are some big players behind the scenes pulling some strings? Not going to point names or name fingers, but I think it is fairly apparent”.