It’s worth remembering, QAR was never about helping advisers

Understanding this, really letting it digest, could allow advisers to change their outlook on the report and what it means for the industry.

As you probably know (unless you were on a digital detox, in which case I envy you) the government published Michelle Levy’s final QAR report in February.

While her insights and recommendations were not exactly surprising, given her frequent speaking engagements, the sheer length of the 267-page report was quite intimidating.

Even Financial Services Minister Stephen Jones appears to have had trouble digesting its contents given it took him almost two months to read it and click publish.

Michelle openly confesses in the report that her goal was not to aid financial advisers, digital advice providers, or any other industry players.

Instead, her central focus was on the consumer and their need for accessible, affordable, and safe financial advice.

This truth is challenging the industry to re-evaluate its priorities and strive towards a system that prioritises the wellbeing of the consumer above all else.

Speaking on a recent ifa podcast, the chief executive officer of the Association of Financial Advisers (AFA) made a similar point.

Discussing Michelle’s detractors, Phil Anderson explained that as the review was designed by the former minister herself, it was always intended to focus on the central issues of access and affordability of advice.

“We have to be conscious that that’s the approach that she took, and we have to, at the same time, work with her to ensure that the solutions deliver better outcomes for financial advisers,” Mr Anderson said.

While he hopes that delivering better outcomes for advisers is a “substantial outcome” of the review, Michelle, he stressed, was commissioned and directed to focus on creating better outcomes for consumers.

And that she did, according to the Joint Associations Working Group (JAWG), which represents a large portion of the country’s advisers.

Praising her for putting the interests of consumers front and centre, the JAWG said the report provides the catalyst for a strong reform agenda.

So perhaps, instead of questioning Michelle’s political affiliations and compensation, the industry should embrace the report as an opportunity for fundamental change.

As the popular saying goes, “don't let perfect be the enemy of good”.

It’s time for the industry to come together and use the report as a launching pad for meaningful and lasting change.