In a LinkedIn post on Friday, AFA acting chief executive Phil Anderson said recent comments made by Labor senator Jenny McAllister in Parliament around “shonky advisers” – which the association has said amount to vilification of practitioners in the industry – had come directly as a result of a recent submission from advocacy group Super Consumers Australia.
Mr Anderson said in its submission around the legislation Senator McAllister was responding to, which involved extending the number of members in an SMSF, Super Consumers had said it was concerned about the bill “[increasing] the potential for advisers to recommend an SMSF when it is not in a person’s best interests”.
“There is a risk that advisers and accountants, in recommending an SMSF, may be able to charge higher fees than if they recommended a retail or industry fund. The key question is whether this risk would be greater because of this bill and whether there is anything more, (above all the existing obligations) that should be done to remove this risk,” he said.
“In terms of removing the risk of inappropriate advice, seemingly the only option is to force financial advisers to provide this advice at no charge. How else can this risk be removed?”
Mr Anderson pointed to subsequent submissions the advocacy group had made to ASIC’s advice affordability review and Report 627 on consumer trust in advisers, saying the group was “obsessed with conflicts of interest” in the advice sector and had incorrectly asserted that asset-based fees led to advisers “recommending products that are poor value”.
“This is a baseless claim that speaks to ideology and an obsession with adviser remuneration, rather than the value advisers provide,” he said.
“It is ironic to see Super Consumers Australia talk about the industry rebuilding community trust, when much of what they do and say, seems to be working in the opposite direction.”
Mr Anderson noted that after being initially handed $2.5 million in funding from CBA and ANZ fines for super mis-selling in 2013, the advocacy group had been given a further $1.7 million in this year’s budget.
“It would be interesting to know what if any accountability obligations come with this government funding?” he said.
“Many financial advisers will find this interesting, particularly when Super Consumers Australia has demonstrated little understanding of financial advice and has seemingly done much to undermine consumer confidence in financial advice.”
In other news, another adviser was banned for four years for providing inappropriate advice. What’s the run rate on that statistic?
Super Consumers Australia is not a “consumer advocacy” group. It as an offshoot of political activist group Choice. It doesn’t represent the views of consumers, it represents the narrow ideology of a small group of zealots who have hijacked the organisation to impose their views on society. Public funding for these political activists needs to be cut off.
[i]It doesn’t represent the views of consumers, it represents the narrow ideology of a small group of zealots who have hijacked the organisation to impose their views on society. Public funding for these political activists needs to be cut off.[/i]
I thought you were talking about the Liberal Party there for a moment.
The difference between political activists and politicians is that politicians are elected. Like it or not, the Liberals were elected. If you want to get rid of them, vote for someone else and hope enough people agree with you.
The way to get rid of political activists is to ignore them, and defund them if they get taxpayer money.
Would love to hear why Federal Liberal did this – certainly not for my vote.
Thanks Josh and Scott – never vote liberal again.
You think Albo and his goon squad would be much better? They are union based…
Yes, but they employ him.
Labor would be no better. The Liberal gave this bloke over $1,000,000. The Liberal with Scott Morrison have been responsible for the largest increase in FUM held by Industry Super – no other politician has done more for Industry Super than Scott Morrison I suspect.
I’m waiting for a Trump – to clean the swamp (ie ASIC, Treasury and all the self interest groups).
And yet, other forum comments from the likes of Ben Dover & Anderson from AIOFP claim they’ll vote Labor instead of Libs next election… yeah such an intellectual move – especially when Labor are banging on like this and their voice pieces like this super consumer group are vilifying planners!!!
100% Agree ! These funds would be better spent on financial literacy in high schools. Educating our Senior High Schoolers on the basics of Superannuation, savings and compound interest, credit and the real costs and scam prevention would be a long term solution to the “disengaged” super consumers all the current legislation is trying to fix. Educate, don’t legislate.