Self-licensed adviser David Haseldine of NSW practice The Updated Investor launched the petition on Change.org this week, urging politicians to include advisers in the conversation around the removal of red tape as the government moves towards its Quality of Advice review in 2022.
“Economic uncertainty, complicated super and tax laws, and even more complicated scams mean Australians need to plan for their futures like never before. However, only three years ago financial planner numbers in Australia were close to 30,000. Today that number is heading very quickly toward 18,000 and many are predicting it will go far lower,” the petition states.
“This means countless clients have had the valued relationship with their trusted financial planner severed and others who would like and need good financial planning, now have nowhere to turn.
“And yet, lawmakers have never asked good financial planners (the ones actually talking to clients) what is needed to turn the tide in enabling an industry to effectively serve the needs of every Australian.”
With around 50 advisers having signed and left comments in support of the petition so far, Mr Haseldine – who most recently took on AMP with his own data project to share terminated planners’ experiences after his exit from the wealth giant – said he believed the legal framework for advice needed to be rewritten from the ground up.
“It is my opinion that won’t happen until politicians appreciate how large the problem is, and the only way they are going to get an appreciation is if financial planners bypass all the usual gatekeepers and their agendas which have nothing to do with good financial planning,” Mr Haseldine said.
“I’m referring to institutionally owned licensees and planners, and industry associations – approximately 14 of them – and their agendas based on self-preservation rather than anything really meaningful.”
He added that the industry was being “decimated” by successive waves of regulation while quality advice was more and more difficult for consumers to access.
“Simply put, the current industry and legislative framework is not working. What I would like to see on behalf of financial planning as a stand-alone profession is a series of consultations with government at public hearings, during which all the usual protagonists are sidelined,” Mr Haseldine said.
Check out the petition here.
Well done. Long over due. Let’s start making some noise. We’ve been quiet for far to long! I will be distributing it to all my client and family. Let’s stick together on this one.
I have signed, donated $300 (got us 7,500 views) and forwarding to ALL friends, family, and clients!
[b]Financial Planners need to quit whinging and get off their arses![/b]
We can do better than the mortgage brokers!
This sort of stuff is the only thing politicians care about – watching the polls, petitions, comments etc to navigate their electorate and spin everything to get the most votes!
Politicians don’t care, I’m really confused what signing the petition is supposed to achieve. It’s the equivalent of saying Australian’s need good roofers.
Dont be so negative and get on board and try and make a difference, its up to us.
I’m sorry but politicians have bigger fish to fry – Federal election 2022, pandemic, PR stunts, unemployment, scandals, and lots more. 18,000 advisers (and shrinking) is just too small for them to care about
18,000 advisers * 100 clients = 1,800,000 clients.
All of whom are paying higher fees because of nonsensical, overly complicated, and unhelpful compliance.
Get your clients on board as well and there becomes a voice too large to ignore.
Yep, 1.8 Million voters is over 10% of voters. Plus the piddle 18,000 Advisers + 50,000 Adviser admin and support staff. So more like 12% of the voting population was can muster to tell Frydenberg to get stuffed.
Adviser have more than sufficient client relationships – and long-term relationships. If the Liberal believe they can afford to loss my vote and all the clients to take with me know and into the future, then good for them.
Labor only wants the FUM for Industry Super – delivered thanks to Scott and Josh – so no I will not vote for them either.
But there is a trend to independents.
If the Liberal want my vote, start talking.
Rex Patrick
Centre Alliance
Not sure if you’re being sarcastic or serious, maybe you won’t care when there are very few good planners left, but plenty of people will.
Great initiative – i have signed and donated…..we don’t have lobbyists, so support this approach. We all know the industry is being strangled – change is needed, step up Advisers!
Great work David Haseldine, I have signed the petition and will be sending an email to the link to all my clients (and those clients I have had to dump due to rising costs).
I’ll sign. What is the petition titled?
The link is at the bottom of the article
Australia needs good financial planners
What!!! Industry Associations having there own vested interests….shock horror. Who would of guessed that the Best Interest obligations don’t actually apply to the FPA. When will members of these bodies stand up and take back control.
And advisers don’t have vested interests??? Everyone is vested in some way and will want to have things slant their way. I want to see the really good forward thinking advisers and independent licensees prosper but the rusty old advisers and the borderline capable small licenses need to be cut out. And the really good independent licensees are already including frontline adviser experience and input.
At the moment we have no say whatsoever.
Yes, financial advisers also have a vested interest, but it is not unreasonable to request that for once we actually have a say in reforms.
By the “rusty old advisers” do you mean the very experienced advisers who have had many years servicing and looking after their satisfied clients?
By the “borderline capable small licenses (sic)” do you mean all those small businesses with experienced and qualified advisers who aren’t with large companies and have 5 degrees after their names?
I think you need to be very careful how you word your rather deprecating and somewhat offensive comments.
Sorry if I touched a nerve bigal. Length of service does not mean a good 21st century adviser. In the many years that I’ve been in the industry working at all levels I’ve worked with good, bad and indifferent. The vertically integrated institutions have shielded a lot of advisers for the sake of keeping up numbers and that means there are advisers who should have been counselled into a different career. But at the same time they have brilliant advisers – many who leave them to get more independence for their clients. Holding your own licence is an intense choice and some do it really well while some should be under a bigger umbrella. I’m not down on the industry, I just want to see the best advisers giving the best most up to date advice in the most compliant way.
Yes of course planners there own self interest. But I think the point is that the parties involved in the Financial Planning industry (licensee’s, planners, insurers, firms like AwareSuper) have different and competing interests and at times these have been presented as one by those that represent us, at perhaps the sacrifice of Advisers. I believe Mr Haseldine is trying to make a point the interests of Planners have not been properly represented. I would take the voice of a planner to stick up for a client any day as opposed to an Insurance company or licensee.
Wow! if you have a problem with advisers trying to be listened to and consulted only to stop the destruction of the industry then you need to open your eyes, talk to some “rusty old advisers” who have experience and seen their fair share over 20+ years. You sould like you may be a “new naive one dimensional” adviser?
No Robert. 35 years in the business working with both institutional and small innovative licensees and very fortunate to have worked with some of the best advisers around. So obviously I’ve had the opportunity to work with a very broad spread of advisers across all states.
I still don’t see why you would be against advisers having a say in the future of the industry for the first time, as opposed to the large financial institutions that have had control over the voice of the industry through FPA, FSC, licencees etc.
Eliminate the conflicted licencee structure (with improved educational standards) and most of the ridiculous compliance requirements are not required. Lawyers, accountants, every other profession doesn’t need this conflicted middle man involved so why should we. Why are you advocating that the conflicted institutions continue to dominate discussions?
Simplification of compliance will lead to better value for money for consumers as well as the potential for greater regulatory oversight since bad advice should be easier to recognise.
Enough is enough, it is time for advisers to have a voice in their own profession just like every other occupation has.
If only politicians listened, what an anomaly that would be.
What a novel idea, imagine the Canberra bubble Pollies and bureaucrats actually consulting and even thinking of listening to Real Advisers.
Buh huh huh huh huh …………………. yeh tell him he’s dreaming : – (
HA yeah right… Giving the devil the key…
I hope you get the mental help you need my friend. Stay strong.
What is the petition tiled?
Too much common sense here and not enough votes for a politician to take any interest.
That’s what the pollies think. They have no idea how important financial planners have been over the years. We are the ultimate ‘influencers’, and have been around long before social media. Silently working away, speaking with voting clients, supporting Coalition policies and influencing our communities. Now we have had a gutful. They have turned us into a bitter enemy. The fools don’t even see it coming. They keep piling on more and more red-tape without a clue. Unless there is some sort of major disruptive change, which yanks the pendulum back the other way fast, we will be a major thorn in their side and a key reason why their paper-thin majority will be torn to shreds.
Correct, but if we influence say 100 of our clients, multiplied by say 15000 advisers that would be enough votes to shake their cage. The associations will not achieve that but we as advisers could.