I am surprised there are not more departures of advisers. (the death by a thousand cuts)
My guess is the numbers will keep declining ( I cant see any reason why you would want to be part of the industry and I certainly wouldn’t encourage it to any aspiring professional)
Sad comment really just at the time when we need the skill sets, to help the cohort of people lining up to exit the workforce. (You know those that have been in the work force for the last 40 + years)
honestly nobody should be surprised - the back-room boys in the union world have control of the narrative, - and we who thought advisers might try to push back - have bedwetters sitting on the sidelines - who are in denial. The raft of moral imperatives, (either real or imagined) that were poorly wrapped up in the need to be more skilled, the need to have the standards above the legal requirements of the Corps Act, - have proven to be a well-constructed lie.
The response to the (euphemistically called QAR - should have been retitled the coup de grâce) by the labor team to provide a total carve out to the obligations that were so strenuously needed to make sure the industry was professional.
The Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry. was the key plank. It provides the lead in the title Misconduct - Banking Superannuation and Financial Services.
Just an aside - Even a little bit of insight can show that we have about 3.2 trillion Aus in this tax structure - approximately half of that is under the direct control of the cabal of the ISN and the labor side of politics - both directly and indirectly. It’s curious how of the 72 recommendations - (noting that close enough to 50 % of the money is under the control by the ISN world) you would be hard pressed to find one full comment (direction)directed that way.
Even if you are not an adviser - or a "bit" player on the side with less skin in the game, it's not possible to make the observation that problems will not exist across the fence as it were and these are at the detriment to the "advice industry"

As an adviser - I could reel off many instances of dishonest behaviour (that deliberately seek to breach Standard One of the FASEA obligations) by the erstwhile ISN team. So now Mr. Jones has executed the total carve out- for the mates, no requirement for recognized training standards, no professional standards, no education hurdles, no FASEA Exam as even a start point to ram home ethics, no adviser levy, no mandated and expensive education - the list is endless to the new barriers introduced under the guise of the moral imperative. - please it was always about the level playing field how can we carve out from a commercial perspective and keep all and sundry away from the honey pot – and one big honey pot it is. To all the bewetters, that have decried that the process would increase professionalism, to all the nanny state group think idealogues from within the adviser ranks. Is it obvious now? Or do we have a bad case of denial? - Denial, I don't happen to believe in that either.