Mr Palmer told the Australian Financial Review on Sunday that he would side with Labor and the Greens to vote down the government’s amendments, ending months of speculation as to where the MP for Fairfax and his Palmer United Party senators-elect may stand.
“What sort of an idiot tries to take away from Australians their normal rights to a fair go?” said Mr Palmer.
“We’ll get rid of [the FOFA amendments]. The men and women of Australia – the pensioners and working classes – should be allowed to rely on the advice they’re given.”
Meanwhile, Senator Nick Xenophon rose in parliament yesterday to formally oppose the amendment Bill, having expressed his concerns with the Bill on Twitter last week.
“The FOFA legislation under the previous government was not perfect but it was one that I supported because it addressed some yawning gaps in consumer protections for consumers of financial advice – gaps that turned into chasms of financial disaster for too many Australians,” Mr Xenophon said, singling out Commonwealth FP and Storm Financial in particular.
“Who wants to go back to the bad old days which saw planners inherently conflicted between earning commissions and giving advice in the best interests of their clients? If the industry has nothing to hide then it has nothing to fear.”
The South Australian senator also criticised the government’s stated approach, arguing that implementing the amendments via regulation is “not enough” and that “a legislative framework is preferable”.
The independent senator also alleged that “two thirds [of advice clients] are completely passive and may not even know they are paying advisers”.
However, FPA general manager, policy and conduct, Dante De Gori, told ifa the decision to enact the bulk of the amendments through regulation is “effective and smart”.
What sort of an idiot tries to take away from Australians their normal rights to a fair go? said Mr Palmer.
Might just be the same idiot that makes such statements as these Mr Palmer?
@PB – FoFA does not stop any of that conflict. Unfortunately messers Palmer and Xenophon have no idea what they are talking about. Their own remarks demonstrate this.
If you asked either what the best interest duty actually means (under FoFA), they would not be able to tell you – other than to say – “It means you have to act in the best interests of the client”. My eight year old son could do better.
How does anything introduced by FOFA stop the conflict that a bank adviser has in recommending bank products to earn a bonus. Or, dare I say it, an industry fund adviser’s conflict in recommending an industry fund?
If you want un-conflicted advice then say so and legislate it. There will be lots of unemployed advisers.
It’s also interesting that FOFA has led to 80% of the industry becoming part of a vertically aligned business,
The dead hand of government at work.