AIOFP questions associations efforts over LIF
The Association of Independently Owned Financial Planners (AIOFP) has questioned the ability of the Financial Planning Association (FPA) and Association of Financial Advisers (AFA) to act in the interests of advisers and will argue against the adoption of the Life Insurance Framework (LIF).
AIOFP, executive director, Peter Johnston, said in a statement released to members there was also a ‘deep rift' between the two adviser associations and the Financial Services Council (FSC) over the specifics of the LIF.
Johnston's claim for a split between the three parties is based on "a recent discussion with a leading product manufacturer executive".
In his statement Johnston stated "the FPA and AFA are livid with the FSC over being manipulated to meet the FSC political objectives to heavily tilt the market in favour of direct internet/telemarketing sales and a return to in house institutional conflicted advisers at the expense of independent advisers, small business and choice for consumers."
Johnston has previously stated the three groups acted in concert due to pressure from institutional interests and supporters, which was in turn rebuffed by the FPA which stated only practitioner members had voting rights in the association.
He claimed the FSC needed the support of the FPA and AFA to show the Federal Government there was widespread industry support for the LIF with Johnston claiming the FPA and AFA ignored members "and supported a heavily institutional weighted outcome that threatens the survival of the independent adviser and disadvantages consumers".
"The question remains as to whether the FPA and AFA are naïve, incompetent or just committed to acting in the best interests of the majority of their members or revenue source?"
Johnston repeated previous claims that advisers were being used for political purposes and the LIF outcomes would not be in their best interest stating "there is only one way to stop this happening…….."
"We will be emailing every member of Federal Parliament today with our views on why the FSC/FPA/AFA proposal to the Minister disadvantages consumers, will destroy small business and exacerbate the Nations chronic underinsurance position."
FPA chief executive Mark Rantall said his association would not comment on rumours, but had “worked tirelessly in consultation with our members and other associations to get to an agreed position that will positively reform the industry”.
“There is currently a lot of unhelpful ‘noise’ in the industry and actions to the contrary of this process, particularly from self-interested parties, are unhelpful both for the industry and for consumers,” Rantall said.
AUTHOR
Jason Spits
Recommended for you
The month of April enjoyed four back-to-back weeks of growth in financial adviser numbers, with this past week seeing a net rise of five.
ASIC has permanently banned a former Perth adviser after he made “materially misleading” statements to induce investors.
The Financial Services and Credit Panel has made a written order to a relevant provider after it gave advice regarding non-concessional contributions.
With the election taking place on Saturday (3 May), Adviser Ratings examines how the two major parties could shape the advice industry in the future.
