The financial advice sector was largely disappointed in the slow process of the Labor government and former minister Stephen Jones in advancing the Delivering Better Financial Outcomes (DBFO) reforms, with just the first tranche being passed and half of the second being released for consultation just ahead of the election.
Following Labor’s substantial victory at the polls, the job of finalising the process that began with the Quality of Advice Review under the previous Coalition government falls to Minister Mulino.
Speaking at a Financial Services Council (FSC) event on Wednesday morning, the new minister acknowledged his predecessor’s work on advice reform, calling the passage of the first tranche a “big achievement by Stephen Jones”.
“I also want to acknowledge that there was a tranche of exposure draft legislation was put out for consideration between March and May, and what I’m working to do is to get the next piece of exposure dropped out as soon as practical, and that’s not going to be the next few weeks, because it is a complex piece of work,” Minister Mulino said.
Having met with a range of stakeholders over his two months in the job, he said the feedback is that it is difficult to “fully digest” that draft legislation until they see how the elements from the final stage will work together with what has already been announced.
“I certainly don’t want to delay this. I’m looking to work on this as a real priority, and this is one of my top two or three priorities at the moment, but I’m also conscious that it is complex,” Minister Mulino said.
“I’m conscious that there are a wide range of views and I totally acknowledge and thank all the various players for trying to find the maximum overlap, the maximum area of consensus possible.
“But I’m also conscious of the detail matters in an area like this. I want to get this right, but the next step will be to put out the disclosure legislation on what you might call 2B, so that people can then fully digest all those elements deeply.”
Financial advice needs a ‘healthy pipeline’
Minister Mulino also noted he wanted to be clear that “Australians having access to high-quality advice is something that I see as very important”, while acknowledging that there has been a number of challenges that have led to adviser numbers dropping.
“The reduction in the number of advisers over recent years … is a matter of concern to me, because we know that at the same time that that’s happened, the number of Australians at retirement has increased, and that’s going to continue,” the minister said, adding that he wants to “talk to the adviser community about how we can deal with that”.
“I know that there are some issues around the professional pathways, which are really important, and so I think that’s part of what we need to get new advisers. We need that pipeline to be healthy. That’s something I see is really important.”
Turning to the expansion of financial advice beyond the “full-fee, sophisticated advice model”, Minister Mulino said there needs to be an acknowledgement that this isn’t always needed for every client.
“There are many, many instances where people on lower balances, for example, or people at various points in their life, might need something different to a full advice offering,” he said.
“They might need, for example, a nudge to get out of a product which is inappropriate for them, or they might need very simple guidance on what their next step might be, or what they should consider. I think we need to have a system where people can potentially reach out to or be reached out to by a service provider in ways that have guardrails, appropriate guardrails, but that don’t need them to be paid huge fees.
“Now, I don’t see that as undermining the advice model, because I think there is going to be a growing number of people who need sophisticated advice, and that’s why I think it’s critical that we have a good pipeline of people coming into the advice sector.”
However, for the “middle chunk” that only requires very simple guidance, the minister said there needs to be a “regulatory structure which allows for that”.




Financial advice needs a ‘healthy pipeline“ says latest old mate…
Fact check : It has been well and truly blocked for many years now and will take far more than a NCA to clear!
Industry funds will secure green light to offer cheap advice blind Freddy can see this union
Just grabbing another bag of popcorn to watch this horror movie unfold given the producer has just given us all a trailer of what is going to end up on the big screen…!
A nightmare on elm street…
The texas chainsaw massacre…
Wolf creek…
See us ell rrr…
More likely Wolf of Wall Street 2.
Not sure the Labor Party is now even bothering to maintain the image that they are in power to represent the working class? Seems to me the Labor is only interested in the Superannuation of the working masses feeding more and more FUM?
Awesome, I can’t wait for the ‘hot mess’ that is financial planning to be resolved.
“They might need, for example, a nudge to get out of a product which is inappropriate for them..” Is this really going to happen at Industry Super?
Hello MM, please find a list to help Australians get REAL Advice, this should take precedence over Industry Super Fund back packer FUM sales. But hey we know where your donations and control come from so Real Advisers only expect to see big wins for ISF FUM sales.
Anyway, if you wanted to be a good Minister for all Australians and not just ISF, then:
– 1) ASIC Levy on Advisers to be NIL, we are already taxed to pay for Govt services, this is a double taxation. And ASIC have never once taken off ALL the FINES collected, as promised to offset Adviser Levy.
– 2) 50% to 75% reduction in Canberra’s MORONIC Red Tape Regs & Costs over Advice. Fix the HOT MESS, CUT THE GORDIAN KNOT. And Real Advisers will be able to serve 2 to 3 times the numbers of Australians v current numbers at more affordable rates.
– 3) CSLR must go. The moral hazard caused from MIS failures and frauds is obscene to charge to innocent Real Advisers. If the CSLR is kept, then EVERY part of the Financial Service advice chain must contribute. PROPORTIONATE LIABILITY IS ESSENTIAL.
– 4) Adviser CPD cut to 10 hours pa. If Canberra Pollies & Bureaucrats who many are Lawyers only make Lawyers do 10 hrs CPD pa of which includes only 1 hr compulsory Ethics. Then the Lawyers making the rules should apply the same CPD rules to Advisers.
Please get to work MM.
Don’t let good get in the way of average…lol
If only financial advisers were allowed to nudge people in the right direction instead of turning them away with nothing because they can’t afford full advice.
Doesn’t take much of a genius to understand that whatever legislative change goes ahead will undoubtedly assist ‘friends of the party’.
How we in Australia tolerate legislators and super trustees having arguably massive conflicts of interests is insane.
Every advice discussion in Australia is coloured and tainted by these relationships. Every change is a proxy war for the control and power that comes with massive FUM.
Compliance = higher fees.
Why whinge?
the ONLY way RETAIL adviser numbers will increase is the complete elimination of Annual Fee Renewals, red tape that doesn’t exist in any other nation on earth, except here. Funny how adviser numbers haven’t been halved in any other nation over the past 5 years, except in Australia.
FFS! Move on, if Annual Fee Renewals are your biggest issue you’ve probably got your priorities wrong. How about having the ability to use professional judgement and experience to provide advice without all the excess compliance so that you can prove to someone (who usually has never been an adviser) that you did the right thing for the client.
So just another union controller ALP politician doing a lot of talking with absolutely no action, seems like Stephen Jones all over again. His real priority will be to carve out advice to be controlled by the union funds to ensure they protect their funds under management. He isn’t interested in speaking to real advisers, and he clearly hasn’t because if he had he would know the education pathway has very little to do with why there are less advisers. It is the layers of regulation that benefit no one and the constant persecution by ASIC that make it a misery to be an adviser.
The middle chunk arguably benefit most from actual professional unbiased existing financial advice.