In a communication to members, AIOFP executive director Peter Johnston said the new campaign would “formally commence” the association’s political strategy to oust Coalition MPs holding marginal seats.
The video outlines some of the ways in which the large institutions have seemingly sought to blame small business advisers for the woes of the industry with the help of subsequent government policy, and how the resulting red tape has forced many advisers to raise their costs or exit the sector.
“Financial advisers need your help to send a clear message to all Coalition politicians – to voice your concerns and tell them that unless things change you will reconsider your vote,” the video said.
“If you want to save $7,500 over the next three years with lower advice costs, don’t want to deal with bank telemarketers or computers to get advice and instead want your adviser to survive in business and look after you, we all need to send a clear message to the Coalition – enough is enough.”
Mr Johnston said the new campaign was designed to get advisers “enraged with the past seven years of treatment and prepared to do something about it”.
“It is designed to give the following messages: to advisers – engage your clients into the debate around them being collateral damage with unnecessary high advice costs; to clients – they are paying unnecessarily for skyrocketing advice costs and the government is trying to put their adviser out of business; and to the government – stop giving advisers grief or we will return the favour in your marginal seats,” Mr Johnston said.
The new campaign is the next step in the industry association’s campaign to unseat Coalition MPs in marginal seats in protest at the regulatory burden being imposed on advisers.
In February, Mr Johnston said the AIOFP would target eight marginal seats around the country with a range of demands including relaxation of education standards for experienced advisers and raising commission levels under the LIF rules.
He said the association would soon release further information outlining frequently asked questions around the campaign and what advisers could do to assist.
Reminds me of clive palmers “were not going to take it” campaign
Ive been a member of one of the big two organisations for the past 5 years, I feel like I have had no benefit whatsoever from it. I don’t care about anything else except getting our image in the public sorted. If we have the public onside the
pollies soon follow. These people in the big organisations especially at the top are too far gone to realise this, they are lap dogs, they have no guts, they dont fight for anything. They want a cruisy job living off members fees, but not working purely for us. They wont put their heads up in the mainstream press to debate anyone, they are cowards. They dont deserve our respect, or our money. Im over being trampled on in the press, being a punching bag, being put into the same basket as crooks and thieves. Its enough! If they were my employees they would be sacked by now for non performance so how the hell do we trust them with our futures. I want a voice in parliment and in the public arena that will be listened to. I want a organisation to put some ads out about how we help clients, to differentiate us from the unlicenced ones, one that askes for member feedback before talking to those that can make a difference. After a lot of thought, I will now join the AIOFP, as it seems they are acting in their members best interests. If we keep backing the same people we will get the same result, if we all joined the AIOFP it would make it very strong and a voice to be listened to. They may not be perfect but what is? You may not like some people in there but think about the big picture. Dont listen to the self interested ones, they dont give a rats about you, think for yourself, dont you want to walk around with your head held high? Dont YOU want to be the ones that made the difference? Don’t feel false loyalty for those that have not worked in your best interests, if those other organisations have to close , so what? Planners have had to close up due to thier incompetence! People have gone bankrupt, lost thier business, lost their will to work, embarrased to say they are planners, this is serious stuff that needs to change. We can be better, our jobs can be better, but we have to fight.
FPA and AFA: Slow way to go to just a few advisers via strangulation from red tape.
AIOFP: The quick way to get out of business. Cowboys with the occasional good insight.
Whats the alternative then? Any ideas?
FPA was only 4.6% value for money!
AIOFP was 32.2%!
Thank you Peter and AIOFP as you seem to leading the way.
Phil Anderson. from AFA however is also doing a great job leading the AFA now!!!!
Dainte?
Talk about divide and conquer, three associations now representing advisers/planners, the AFA, FPA and AIOFP!
No wonder the government isn’t listening, who do you listen to?
That’s partly your fault bigal and I suspect you have unrealistic expectations… The FPA is the Financial “Planning” Association…they are very open they don’t represent Advisers but will represent all parties, the licensee’s, product manufacturer’s, the Barefoot Investor all equally. The AIOFP represents Advisers only. The choice is yours. In regards to the FPA and the AFA, Licensee’s, the banks, AwareSuper makes membership of the FPA compulsory and pays for there membership so the FPA will often act for those firms at the expense of the adviser. You have to make a choice whether you want to advance the industry or advance the needs of Australians and Advisers.
This is lunacy.
Frydenbergs hate of Advisers and devoted love of the banks.
Frydenberg making Jane Hume Minister for Digital Economy – to promote Robo Advice / Bank Product sales.
Ms Press of ASIC saying she wants more affordable advice and then every month adds massive new costly REGS.
Frydenberg, LNP & AISC’s last 8 years of Exponentially increasing Red Tape Advice costs & BS REGS Costs, to the detriment of the clients its meant to protect.
Yep agreed it is Utter Lunacy.
Jane Hume worked for Australian Super before entering politics. No prize guessing where her loyalties lie.
I cannot understand why any adviser would pay the AFA a subscription. They do not represent us – and, instead, seem to have the objective to destroy our profession. I don’t agree with the position of the AIOFP in a couple of respects – my personal view is advisers should operate 100% fee for service – and we should have high education qualification standards. But I do support the voice of the AIOFP – and do support any move to simplify the growing and ridiculously onerous administrative burden on advisers.
AFA and FPA
You’ll find the majority of FPA and AFA members join not because they want too, but because they are forced too. Either due to compulsory membership or TPB requirements. This has lead to very poor outcomes for advisers and a certain culture at these organizations..
Join the SMSF Org….
Great work AIOFP
As a life long blue blood LNP voter and Adviser of 22 years, I’ve had a total gut full of Frydenbergs hate of Advisers.
Frydenberg & LNP have killed Advisers for too long and his unwavering love of the banks to the detriment of Real Advisers must stop.
Out with Frydenberg,
Out with Danielle Press and clean ASIC up.
Good job AIOFP… Thanks for sticking up for Advisers and Australians….In my 20 plus years as an adviser I have never seen any association positively advocate for Financial Advisers the way the AIOFP does.
Not a member of AOIFP, but it is great to see we have one professional body willing to properly stand up for financial advisers. Shame on FPA and AFA who have allowed the abuse of financial advisers to continue unchallenged. I will be joining the AOIFP in their campaign and I know dozens of others who will also join them. Financial planners have been strong advocates for the Coalition for decades, quietly advocating for them behind the scenes. We are far more influential in our communities than they realise. Now they have turned us into their enemy. This will swing votes in marginal seats and impact the outcome of the next election. Anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves. Hume and Frydenberg are too dumb to realise this. Just like Shorten was too dumb to realise his franking credit policy was a vote killer.
Yet again, the AIOFP do the heavy lifting whilst the FPA do nothing of note. It is a mystery why any self-respecting financial adviser would remain a member of the FPA. The FPA simply don’t represent financial planners properly.
I think you’ll find the majority of FPA members are forced to join by their employer and have their membership paid for them in bulk. You’ll recall the banks made membership compulsory of either the FPA or the AFA during the CBA Advice scandal. They got members, the Banks dodged a bullet and you got FASEA. This is why the FPA attempts to represent every party whether you’re the adviser working for Telstra Super or Telstra Super itself, resulting in poor outcomes for the Adviser.