A number of groups have disclosed their involvement in roundtables hosted by Treasury on the Quality of Advice Review (QAR).
ifa understands that Treasury has been hosting roundtables on each of the three streams that make up the government’s response to the QAR.
Participating in the roundtables are the Financial Advice Association Australia (FAAA), the Association of Independently Owned Financial Professionals (AIOFP), the Stockbrokers and Investment Advisers Association, among others.
Speaking to ifa on Tuesday, Peter Johnston, the executive director of the AIOFP, said the group has engaged with Treasury on the QAR some five times over the last 12 months.
“We’ve met the key people in Treasury, and they are really smart, they really get our industry. They are there without any hidden agenda and to act in the best interest of the consumer,” Mr Johnston said.
“The credit goes to Stephen Jones for that, and we’ve been at each of these meetings, and we’ve given our views, and you just get the feeling that these Treasury people are listening and learning, and we think they’ll come up with the right decision.”
According to Mr Johnston, Minister for Financial Services Stephen Jones is “listening to people in Treasury”.
The AIOFP’s executive director disclosed that there’s been plenty of discussion around the best interests duty and the good advice concept, as well as the life insurance framework.
“We think it’s going in the right direction,” he said.
In June, Mr Jones revealed the government’s response to the QAR final report, categorising it into three distinct streams.
Under stream one, Mr Jones said at the time that the government intends to scrap fee disclosure statements, while replacing statements of advice (SOAs) with “fit-for-purpose” advice records.
Additionally encompassed within this first stream, among various other provisions, is the government’s commitment to remove the safe harbour steps from the best interests duty.
Stream two of the reforms – dubbed the “expanding access to retirement income advice” stream – is poised to see superannuation funds expand their provision of advice. Meanwhile, the third stream encompasses the eight recommendations that the government intends to examine more closely, which notably incorporates the proposed good advice duty.
While little has since been revealed about when advisers can expect to see the stream one recommendations legislated, the FAAA’s CEO, Sarah Abood, previously told ifa that she expects draft legislation to be ready before the year is out.
“We’re very, very pleased with what we’re hearing from the minister and from Treasury on [the stream one recommendations]. These are really important for our members … I’d add that standardisation of fee consent is in this round and I think that’s also very important,” Ms Abood said last month.
Ms Abood added at the time that while the FAAA is conscious that the clock is ticking, “everything that we’ve heard both from Treasury and the minister is recognising the urgency of these changes”.
“[Mr Jones] has said many times in answers to questions he sees these as urgent. He doesn’t want to see urgent changes held up by things that might take a little bit longer to solve,” she said.
“We are hoping we will see draft legislation and at least something ready to go to parliament in this calendar year. Whether it will get all the way through the process or not, I’m not sure.
“But the commitment is there and we’re doing everything we can to progress those.”
By any stretch – the financial adviser community (as opposed to the vested interests) have been taken for a ride again.
The Labor mates running the Industry Super Funds have been given what they want to further strengthen their position. I for one found the definitional acrobatics engaged in by Susan Levy to somehow create a new type of “advice” that applies to the Industry Super Funds that is is different to the “advice” that the rest of us apparently provide – something bordering on an absurdity. Honestly is reminded me of a Monty Python sketch – the “dead” parrot one comes to mind.
Yet – just about everyone seemed to think that this was ok – really?
So – here we are – still dealing with the ridiculous amount of regulation and compliance whilst the Industry Super Funds are falling oer laughing at how easy the whole sham was.
Great work, let’s go Jonesy!
Hate to say it if this goes into 2024 we will have to wait to the next govt.
Compensation for taking my trail income of me? No mention of this. Why not? Cost me $1.0M of my hard earned wealth. AIOFP and FAAA – still not representing advisers.
If you were doing the work for the client, you’d have been able to keep it
Good argument – so why is Michelle Levy allowing “Good Advice” to be charged to the membership – not good enough to able to charge for it?
According to Mr Johnston, Minister for Financial Services Stephen Jones is “listening to people in Treasury”.
I’m sorry I to have call BS on that one
[b]Jonesy only listens to Industry Super or anyone agreeing with and pushing Industry Super. [/b]
Most Govt bureaucrats are very pro Industry Super as most bureaucrats are major Left Wing supporters and it all fits nicely in their little Canberra bubble.
Hope we actually see some legislation asap, any reprieve would be helpful and stream 1 particularly so for IFA and real advisers.
Why hasn’t the industry moved to standardise the FCF already? What is stopping them doing it?
Not sure this change would even save much time anyway.
No fds saves time, standardisation also helps
“We’ve met the key people in Treasury, and they are really smart, they really get our industry. They are there without any hidden agenda and to act in the best interest of the consumer”. Yep, I’m from the government and I’m here to help you.
Having read the submissions from Treasury to the Royal Commission – it appeared to me the authors of the Treasury submissions or Treasury had some very negative personal views of Financial Planners – basically calling Financial Planners unethical for putting people in underperforming products simply to line our pockets, needing Ethics training (FASEA – I call the Communist Re-Education Camp) – seemed clear to me they/Treasury favoured the view put forward on Industry Super TV advertising – but I could be wrong?
Lets recheck what happened –
Retail Super and Financial planners nil?
Industry Super domination of FUM and some new way they can deliver advice – seems to be the winner?
Phase 1 almost exclusively helps IFA and real advisers
Seriously – how long does it take to say – no more fee disclosure statements ?
Agree, such a drawn out process.