Mr Bowen this week said that it is in the national interest for the Australian people and victims of banking scandals to be able to access the Hayne banking royal commission’s final report and form their own views, at the earliest opportunity, and that means on Friday, 1 February.
“I have written to the Treasurer requesting the release the final report and related documents of the banking royal commission as soon as practicable after it is received by the government,” Mr Bowen said.
“The Liberal Party has no excuses not to release the final report of the Hayne royal commission when they receive it on 1 February.”
Mr Bowen noted that Treasurer Josh Frydenberg released the royal commission’s interim report on the day they received it, but slammed the government’s handling of the inquiry.
“The government’s handling of the banking royal commission has been woeful from start to finish, having voted 26 times against establishing one and refusing to extend it to hear from more victims of banking scandals,” he said.
“Refusing to release the royal commission’s final report immediately would unnecessarily politicise the handling of the report and give rise to potential material market risks around leaks of all or part of the report.
“Labor called for this royal commission, Labor fought for this royal commission, Labor will establish a Financial Services Royal Commission Implementation Taskforce, and Labor will work day and night to protect Australian businesses and consumers from this appalling misconduct.”
AIOFP executive director Peter Johnston told ifa that although royal commission history clearly demonstrates very little is adopted politically, this one will be different.
“Shadow treasurer Chris Bowen has already indicated he may adopt most of the findings,” he said. “Clearly the advice community needs to now start lobbying the relevant politicians to protect our position.”
The AIOFP has established a strategic alliance with the left-wing Financial Sector Union (FSU) and its deputy leader Nathan Rees, a former NSW premier and Labor party member.
Bowen is a woeful muppet who speaks before he listens…
Perhaps Bowen should try listening first before he speaks? But then that would be like expecting a baby to walk when it is first born. Shorten + Bowen = were all stuffed with them running the economy…
As an adviser whose livelihood will be impacted by the Royal Commission findings, I would have preferred to see a more consultative approach to major industry change.
The bulk of complaints and wrong-doings relate to institutional activity related to banking – not financial advice. These immoral/illegal activities were for the most part committed by management and the executives of the major banks and the larger AFSL’s.
Yet the bulk of the ramifications of this Royal Commission will fall on individual advisers.
In the past, “industry consultation” has mainly been in the form of large institutional white-papers and briefings. The smaller advisers have been ignored. Completely. This is a reflection of the belief that the AFSL holds the liabilities for adviser activities. Although the AFSL setup does attempt to place higher burdens on the AFSL entity, the reality is that it is the adviser who cops the flack; who must attempt to work to the AFSL interpretation of vague legislation; who must always attempt to act in the client best interest while also meeting AFSL guidelines and mandates.
The Royal Commissioner and his crew should be congratulated for the depth and scope of their immense efforts. There is no doubt that major changes are required to better align regulations and industry structure with client best interest outcomes. I’m just not convinced that the commission has sufficient understanding of practical advising issues, and how to efficiently deal with them.
My fear is that the Royal Commission recommendations will attempt to turn advisers into Financial Lawyers. This project is already partway completed. It’d be a pity if the vision of financial planners of the future were to be a financial version of the lawyer’s world.
“Low cost, efficient and straight-forward access to financial services” would be impossible under such a scenario.
My personal wish is that more people would keep this original objective in mind, when making up their minds on structuring the financial services marketplace.
But I am not optimistic.
Hi James Mitchell (author),
Could you please clarify your article.
Your header makes the clear statement that, according to Chris Bowen: “Labor will implement all recommendations if it wins the next election.”.
Reading through your article, I don’t see that Bowen stated this – the nearest attributable quote was that Labor would get have an implementation taskforce. You then quote the AIOFP executive director as saying “Chris Bowen has already indicated he may adopt most of the findings”.
So, what’s the deal here?
#fakenews!?
Bowen has now shown he has no substance and is only bying into the media hype which stokes the fires of populace discontent.
However, note the Sydney Morning Herald online news this morning (1st article) says that through FOI – freedom of information, ASIC and ACCC senior staff have been recieving “gifts” from the banks etc. So, advisers got hammered on this and BDM’s were afraid to buy you a coffee at a meeting to LOOK at the product they wanted you to support………….. So, were these “gifts” to ASIC and ACCC senior staff paid to NOT LOOK at the products the were pushing on the Australian consumers??
If ASIC had done their job 10 to 15 years ago we would never have had the Royal Commission!!!!!!!!!!!!
Here is the article
https://www.watoday.com.au/national/watchdogs-wined-dined-and-given-corporate-gifts-without-scrutiny-20190122-p50sy8.html
“Presents in recent years include champagne and vintage wines, expensive dinners, concert tickets, airline upgrades and customised “training seminars” supplied by stockbrokers, banks, law firms and industry lobby groups.” Didn’t a former Premier of NSW resign due to gifts of wine? So should all these guys.
Thank you for posting this link. I just read it and despite the fact ‘some’ of the items aren’t significant, the fact remains the gifts were received and weren’t willingly disclosed.
I believe this is absolute hypocrisy from ASIC and ATO. They’ve been branding advisers as being ‘conflicted’ for years yet they accept gifts themselves. Disgraceful organisations both of them.
The good people, the good stories, the positive messages were not invited by the Royal Commissioner to come along for a chat, so how could you possible take on 100% of what’s been recommended?
The only people that appeared at the Royal Commission were a) the criminals, b) the victims those with no morals and caught with their pants down… like the FPA leadership and finally the clueless being the CEO’s. The people defending the actions of Financial Planners were CEO’s of the big banks.
If therefore 100% is taken then surely shouldn’t the CEO of the FPA also step down?
Hmmm, sounds like how the arrived at the decision on the LIF reforms! Targeted group of known churners dobbed in by the insurers and then an industry wide decision is made that ALL advisers are churners. WHAT A JOKE! These idiots make someone as bad as Clive Palmer look good??
Agree 100%. Everythinng is based on a lie. I woulld rather they just put out the truth and say they want IFAs gone. his is akin to WMD’s in Iraq LOL. The “C” word attracts hysteria churn, commission, forget about what the clients want. eliminating commission will be the death knell of advice for average clients
agree 100%. FPA is enemy no 1 to honest fin advisers. They are paid to throw sand in our eyes. They do not defend their members. All advisers should cease funding this joke of an organisation
So if the Royal Commission report recommends that the Parliamentary Pension be scrapped as it’s essentially ‘fees for no service’, will Bowser Bowen follow through?
I always considered the combination of Rudd as PM and Swan as Treasurer was the worst since Whitlam and his crew, but that has now changed as the combination of Shorten as PM and Bowen as Treasurer with their class focussed agenda from the early 20th century is going to destroy this country.
As many have already said, how can you agree to implement recommendations without seeing them and the impact they may have on our economy.
Bowen was a incompetent moron when he was Financial Services Minister in the Rudd / Gillard era and based on his latest pronouncement he has not suddenly acquired the capacity for rational thinking. God help us all.
Wrong. The combination of Turnbull and O’Dwyer were far worse!
O’Dwyer was never treasurer you nonce.
Who said she needed to be treasurer to be the worst destructive politician on earth you niff nuff
They’ll both be a distant memory come election time, with one being rolled and the other quitting after seeing the writing on the wall. Think people here forget who is in power. Worst combination is currently Morrison-Frydenberg, not an economic bone in their combined bodies!
Labor is just LNP Lite and won’t be any better. What we need in the Federal sphere is more independents that actually understand the industry and aren’t beholden to the “Canberra bubble”. However, won’t be holding my breath for this to happen.
Vote Australian Conservatives in the Senate!! They’ll keep both parties in line with some common sense!
I will NEVER vote for the major parties ever again in either house. More independents are needed.
How can Bowen come out and say it will agree with all recommendations without knowing what they are and whether they are appropriate for the Australian people and economy. That does not sound like a person who should be in power.
But , I suppose we can all hope one of the RC recommendations is to pay politicians less !!!
How can you say that you will implement all recommendations without even knowing what they are?? Absolutely ridiculous. Bowen is a goose
For Bowen to commit to implementing all recommendations sight unseen is stupid and irresponsible. The RC staff have shown they are quite skilled at uncovering problems. But that is no reason to assume they are skilled at designing solutions to those problems. It is not their core strength.
Indeed on those occasions the RC has strayed into solution mode, it has been evident they are largely regurgitating the ideological dogma of lobby groups, without any consideration for the practicality of implementation or the unintended consequences.
Bowen does his credibility as alternative Treasurer enormous harm by committing in advance to solutions designed by people who are far from expert in the area.
This is the only comment of the 15 so far that I found measured and without hyperbole, miss-spellings and other errors, but is sadly also anonymous… It explains – correctly – that while the RC was very good at investigating it showed little talent (as we’d expect) at finding solutions, which is why Bowen should promise to implement only those of the RC’s recommendations that he finds to be sound. And what a pity those in our industry (still not yet a profession) have so little gumption that they won’t use their names when making either brilliant or stupid comments. It would certainly help us know who knows what, as well as identify self-interest or conflicts.
If everyone was compelled to state their name, you probably wouldn’t get as many rich (entertaining) comments that the IFA is seeking in this blog…that’s the only reason I read it! Why so sanctimonious about having to use your real name?
Pretty hard to lobby anything from the RC recommendations when planners will be used as cattle fodder by the pollies ( Lib and ALP ) and big financial institutions.
Can someone explain to me how joining the FSU will help anyone? The headline here states that Labor “will implement all recommendations if it wins the next election”. Why does anyone think the FSU will miraculously be able to change Labor’s mind to get any concessions.
Pollies being Pollies. This Hayne Report and recommendations are only going to strengthen the banks and will be to the detriment of the privately owned AFSLs and ARs- they even got rid of Dover before they could gather a greater market share in the process.
Reading Fairfax’s story this morning about ASIC being wined, dined and bribed suggests Hayne is on the take too, especially when this should’ve been exposed during the RC.
Rant over.
Government setup the rules that are then followed and come back and tell everyone that things are a mess. All I read is that the government have no idea wtf they are doing come back after each part comes in and they play with the super rules and they wonder why everyone have the shits with them cause they are fking useless. We have ASIC that monitor the shit out of small business and large business retail and guess what they find some bad eggs go and have a look at any industry and you will find the same thing. But ASIC have 0 investigations into industry funds how on what logical basis is that decision made on we are finding issues with providers and they are also involved in industry funds AIA with Hesta TAL for Australian super. advisers all know the shit junk insurance contracts that are provided but the big insurance companies just given to millions of members with watered down contracts but hey the industry funds are all right hey nothing to look here
Who is this “Chris come lately”. All the work in the Royal Commission has been done by the current government!
So without knowing the content or ramifications of the RC final report, Bowen will implement all the recommendations…. mmmm… what a fruitcake. Utter contempt for Australians and due process. How any sane person could vote for this man is beyond me. Lobby lobby lobby, my friends… apathy will hurt everyone.