Respondents to a Money Management survey have delivered an overwhelming vote of ‘no confidence’ to the Financial Adviser Standards and Ethics Authority (FASEA) despite generally supporting the objectives of the FASEA regime.
Just as importantly, nearly 91% of respondents believe that the Assistant Minister for Superannuation, Financial Services and Financial Technology, Senator Jane Hume, would be justified in intervening with respect to FASEA.
Asked the direct question, “Do you have confidence in the Financial Adviser Standards and Ethics Authority”, 97% of the 138 respondents answered “no”.
This was despite the fact 66% of respondents said they supported the objectives of the FASEA regime.
Those respondents stating they had no confidence in FASEA were then asked why, with the overwhelming sentiment being critical of the FASEA board with suggestions that it was conflicted, had not listened to industry feedback, lacked industry experience and was short on common sense.
The responses also suggest that FASEA’s handling of the code of ethics was the straw that broke the camel’s back in terms of adviser confidence, with many respondents declaring their support for a regime which seeks to advance planning towards becoming a profession but their lack of confidence in FASEA.
A number of respondents said that it appeared some members of the FASEA board were pursuing a political agenda and, as such, were not practicing what they preached in terms of meeting ethical standards.
Interestingly, only 23% of respondents said they had sat the FASEA adviser exam with 93% of those passing but whether or not they had passed the exam appeared to make little difference to their critical views of FASEA.
Money Management will be leaving the survey open to further responses.