The new lobbying group AusFIN may present a united front for consumer groups and the industry super funds, but Mike Taylor writes that a closer look at its members reveals a political agenda.
Will the new lobbying group, AusFIN, be granted a seat at the table when it comes to the Government’s ongoing consideration of legislative options concerning the Future of Financial Advice (FOFA) reforms?
Will the body be granted a seat at the table during the consideration of the Cooper Review recommendations?
If so, then one or other of its founding organisations should lose their seat.
AusFIN stands for the Australian Financial Integrity Network, but any objective analysis of the organisations that have given rise to its creation will reveal that it is really an alliance of groups that have already adopted hard-line attitudes on key issues, and which already have strong voices in Canberra.
The constituent organisations are the Industry Super Network (ISN), the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU), the consumer group CHOICE, the Finance Sector Union (FSU), the Australian Financial Counselling and Credit Reform Association, and the Australia Institute.
In the case of the ISN, the ACTU and the FSU, the interconnections extend well beyond their foundation membership of AusFIN. Members of the ACTU executive are trustee directors of major funds making up the ISN, while the FSU is a member union of the ACTU.
For its part, the Australian Financial Counselling and Credit Reform Association receives substantial funding from the Federal Government, while the Australia Institute boasts strong ties to the left of Australian politics, including the Australian Greens.
Just as the industry superannuation funds would argue that the Financial Planning Association (FPA), the Association of Financial Advisers (AFA) and the Financial Services Council (FSC) are all singing from the same philosophical hymn sheet, the same can be said of the ISN, the Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees (AIST) and now, AusFIN.
The Assistant Treasurer, Bill Shorten, and his advisers must therefore be careful to ensure that a balance is maintained with respect to those granted representation in the discussion groups that will be pivotal to the final shape of any new legislation affecting planners.
While those within the industry funds may argue to the contrary, there is little doubt that the ISN and the AIST share the same support base, with the result that there is little discernible difference in the policies they pursue and espouse.
This compares with the FPA, the AFA and the FSC, which, while agreeing on some core policy principles, also harbour some key differences.
While the creation of the so-called AusFIN network may serve to provide the industry super funds and some consumer groups with the ability to portray a united front, this should not be allowed to disguise its origins or its political antecedents.
