The email from FPA chief executive Dante De Gori to Deakin University lecturer Marc Olynyk, which was seen by ifa, was sent on Friday, 16 November.
“I am writing to you concerning the attendance of Adrian Raftery at the 2018 FPA Professional Congress to be held next week in Sydney,” Mr De Gori wrote.
“This relates to Adrian’s role as chair of the AIOFP and the public comments that have been made by the AIOFP about the FPA and the profession in general, which we do not support.
“Through me, the FPA respectively requests that Deakin University withdraw Adrian Raftery from any participation at the FPA Professionals Congress. This includes attendance as an exhibitor and/or as a delegate.
“I would appreciate that this request is escalated to the head of the department for action and I am happy to discuss further if required.”
FPA chair Neil Kendall was copied into Mr De Gori’s email, which the CEO said was confirmation that the decision to ban Mr Raftery is supported by the FPA board.
Mr Raftery was appointed chairman of the Association of Independently Owned Financial Professionals (AIOFP) in August this year.
He is a lecturer and head of financial planning at Deakin University and principal of boutique accounting firm Mr Taxman, as well as a vocal social media participant and charity fundraiser.
The AIOFP chair and a handful of members have been lobbying politicians on both sides of government over the controversial FASEA education requirements for financial advisers.
The FPA’s 2018 Professionals Congress kicks off today in Sydney.
“We look forward to announcing informative, motivational and engaging speakers as part of the program in the lead up to congress,” Mr De Gori said in a statement.
“They will share relevant, up-to-the-minute insights and information that will benefit delegates both personally, and professionally.”
Time for Dante to leap into the Inferno…
1. “…Through ME, the FPA respectively requests…”. Shouldn’t it be “respectfully” requests…”?
2. Who the @$%^& is Dante, and what kind of personal agenda is he running by CC’ing the Board AFTER THE FACT?
In attempting to silence Rafferty, a well qualified, knowledgeable, and experienced Financial Services academic/participant [although I disagree with many aspects of what he says], he reinforces the perception of the FPA as a [attempted] monolithic, self important, self serving “organisation” determined to perpetuate its own self centred interests and agenda. The “Free Market of Ideas” is essential for innovation and development of product and policy.
3. In addition to this, I refer specifically to his [apparently, without consultation] declarations about eliminating grandfathered commissions/fees, thereby destroying business and practice value for thousands of advisers and contravening wide Australian legislative precedent; AND, the REVERBERATING SILENCE of the FPA regarding ASIC’s outrageous, dishonest, and [IMO} corrupt conduct in its vendetta against Terry McMaster and Dover, [probably fomented by the “Big 5”], who were losing large numbers of advisers to Dover, undoubtedly taking their FUM and clients with them – not to mention the impact on 400+ Advisers and 10’s of thousands of clients immediately before the EoFY;
4. I also refer to the FPA’s current [recent] policy of being an organisation which “…acts in the public interest”, as if it is an academic think tank or charity, not a Professional Association.
WTF does Dante think he is, and WTF is he doing?
I dont know the man. I support freedom of communication. Rejecting on basis of views…mmm… bit Totalitarian for me.
FPA does not represent advisers best interests, they are only interested in their own self interest and that of the banks. The only association that actually gets off its backside and stands up for advisers is the AIOFP and that’s why I am a member.
Leave the FPA and come and join the only association that represents your interests.
Another day another reason for me to question my FPA membership…They need to pull their finger out and get their priorities right.
Good bye FPA
No doubt however, he’ll be missing a good conference. The first session is by their key business partner. CBA. It’s titled “How to increase revenue by charging dead people fees.” The next is a compliance presentation by another professional partner member AMP. “How to lie to ASIC 22 times to avoid compliance problems”
The final presentations is by Mr Magoo himself titled “how to make a complaint go away by ignoring it in return for TV appearances” and finally “how NOT to write a FASEA submission” by Danti .
I believe there is a photo opportunity for your face book pages with former CFP Sam Henderson.
Dante, I know that you are better than this! It is time for the advice industry to face up to the challenge of re-building trust with those it has let down. Truth now needs to be at the centre of everything we do. Perhaps these words might provide some inspiration “I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend to the death your right to say it.” Voltaire.
So this is purely because the FPA “do not support the comments”? Where do they draw the line then? Dante is just a puppet for Neil Kendall, past Chair Matthew Rowe (now a FASEA Director) and past CEO Mark Rantall…everyone knows that.
why can’t we go for one day without embarrassing ourselves?
I recommend everyone logs onto LinkedIn and Adrian’s account posting and read for yourself the full email Dante sent. Disgraceful. Glad I’m out of the FPA.
Bloody typical behavior that is common around those from the left . Try and ban / sniffle debate. Personally I dont know Raftery but shutting out thoes who seek to criticize is not the answer . Take his ideas on and debate them in public I say
Mr Raftery has been highly vocal and critical of the FPA and parts of our industry.
It is no surprise then, when those same sections of our industry do not want to associate with him.
Being antagonistic is a choice he has made, and he has his supporters such as the AIOFP.
Mr Raftery, you can’t be all things to all people. At the moment, it looks like you’re ahead of yourself.
The joke that is the FPA! The comedy of the FPA clowns just keeps getting better. Calling it “Professional Congress” just tops it off 🙂
UNBELIEVABLE !! Censorship at the FPA. Voltaire apparently had a motto -“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” What’s next FPA, burning books!.
I do not agree with Mr Raftery on many of his sproutings and grandstanding, but for the FPA to try this on says more about the FPA than Mr Raftery. Mr Raftery has academic freedom and unless he has committed some legal breach somewhere, his delegateship should be recognized. And his Chairmanship of AIOFP is of no import. The FPA should be able to defend it’s policies on FASEA, or is that the real issue?.
And heaven help Deakin Uni if they give in to this STANDOVER rubbish !
What are you worried about FPA? What are you hiding?
Leadership is often about welcoming criticism as the truth is never nearly as bad as the alternative. The FPA has shown poor judgement here by failing to anticipate the response of the aggrieved which will draw far more attention than his presence would have.
Looks like the FPA showing their true colors finally. They never have and never will care about the individual adviser working hard to support his family and clients.
Surely the FPA should encourage everyone to attend Congress! It is a wonderful opportunity for developing open communication with fellow practitioners and key stakeholders. Perhaps they are concerned about the AOIFP’s lobbying for changes to FASEA’s secretive agenda. Or is it that they fear the AIOFP’s views are more in line with financial adviser’s concerns about FASEA than the FPA’s?
Makes you wonder what the FPA agenda is?
Are they afraid that attendees may actually agree with Adrian Raftery and wonder why the FPA Board does not?
This is an educator they want to ban.
An educator who is questioning the notion that all education is relevant to all advisers.
An educator who does not have a vested interest in justifying vertical integration, product flogging, etc.
if the FPA truly think Adrian Raftery is out of step let him attend and allow the FPA members to sort him out.
Convenient in this that the FPA does not comment as to how many common AIOFP/FPA members there are and that FPA rank and file are not impressed with the public leadership of the FPA.
Maybe FPA needs to start handing our credentials like the White House? They could then keep people out who ask embarrassing questions.
It find it hypocritical that the FPA who sees itself as representing all members, regardless of being aligned or non aligned can look to exclude a membership because it simply does not agree with the FPA board viewpoints and its direction (and can accept criticism in a constructive manner). Surely we live in a democracy and given the failing of the FPA (as an example around such people as Sam Henderson who was not short of protectionism), what right do you have to dictate who can be heard and who should be silenced.
The FPA and other such bodies (including the big institutions), have put advisers interests second. I didn’t see the AIOFP being called up to the royal commission!
Maybe you should actually engage and consult and cease your dictatorial approach to furthering your own policy interests. Given you have failed in upholding under FASEA all CFP designations to count towards the 2024 guidelines I may aswell torch the cerificate and save myself a few hundred dollars each year. Get ready for a mass exodus in membership! As the core adviser groups shift to being self licensed many will be questioning your role in this FIASCO
It always seemed quite bizarre that Raftery would take on the role of AIOFP chair. I would hope the FPA letter emphasised that alternative Deakin representatives were quite welcome to attend.
Raftery is a guy worth listening to, but his joining the AIOFP as Chair given that organisation’s questionable track record and the character (and reputations) of the people currently and recently involved, reflects very poorly on his good judgment.
The FPA should remember that Australia is a country where people can have an opinion. If they banned all members who expressed views there would be no-one at their conference.
Sounds reasonable . He’s Head of Financial planning at Deakin , so why would you want anybody but sheep at the FPA congress ???? Cull em out ” Back Door Dante “,. A bit like the banks , we don’t want free speech or different views. Get on the Train !!!!.
Dante De Gori sounds like his mate Sam Henderson mate the bad man making good points go away please
The FPA only wants yes people at the congress. Not anyone that would challenge their ongoing relevance after the LIF/ CFP / FASEA debacles. After this henderson affair, and the fact that the RC said the FPA would not be a good fit for a monitoring body….people wonder how long they will be around for, and in what form.
Adrian Raftery has not been a supporter of the profession. Always happy to talk down Advisers to get published in the media. He lashed out once when he wasn’t approached at an expo. He said it was a wasted opportunity for Advisers to pick his brain. No thanks!