With the timetable for industry stakeholders to make submissions to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission’s (ASIC’s) affordable advice review closing out today, the Minister for Superannuation, Financial Services and the Digital Economy, Senator Jane Hume, is urging advisers to their views clear.
In a statement issued late on Friday, Hume pointed out that the submissions process closed today (Monday) and urged stakeholders to read ASIC’s Consultation Paper 332 ‘Promoting access to affordable advice for consumers’ and to make submissions.
“The Government is focused on supporting the advice industry with fit-for-purpose regulation, while maintaining consumer protections,” she said in a statement. “We know that some interpretations of current regulatory settings are creating barriers to consumers seeking good-quality, affordable personal advice.
“The Government supports a well-regulated and vibrant financial advice sector that supports advisers seeking to help Australians make informed decisions about their personal finances and to make better use of their savings in retirement.”
Hume claimed that, “already, the Morrison Government has taken steps to professionalise the industry, reduce red tape, reinforce trust in advisers, and focus on a greater role for technology to help advisers access the tools they need”.
“We now look forward to considering the outcomes of ASIC’s current consultation process,” she said.
Comments
Sorry Jane, but this is a bit like telling East Germans to submit their suggestions for greater personal freedoms in writing to the Stasi.
Really? Hume has no clue. Has she read the consultation paper? ASIC is only doing this exercise as a PR stunt and to modify the regs to benefit their industry fund mates. It clearly states that the research is focused on what they describe as 'one-off' advice. So let me guess.... ASIC will find a way for intrafund advice regs to be relaxed and independent advisers, who largely focus on ongoing advice will continue to be squashed under a mountain of red-tape and ASIC's insane interpretations or the corps act. Yet Hume expects me to use my extremely limited free time preparing a submission for this sham consultation? What a joke
Exactly, they have been putting out more and more feeder news "how will everyone be serviced" "robo advice" "Tech solutions to making advice easier... everything that doesn't have anything to do with real advisers Jane wants to look like she is doing something but just watch they will water down advice for super fund advisers sorry i mean sales retention people... I believe recently they were even talking about letting call center people give general advice
Call centre people who are employees of super funds already have a regulatory carve out that allows them to give general advice. So do super fund sales people that spruik to workplaces. Many of these people go well beyond the bounds of general advice however, and provide illegal personal advice.
This is now the primary "advice" mechanism for many union super funds and has been totally ignored by ASIC. It wouldn't surprise if ASIC's latest sham consultation exercise is designed to legalise the personal advice regime currently being delivered illegally by super fund employees.
All Minister Hume needs to do is ask her staffers to compile comments from Money Management over the last 5yrs and she'll have all the feedback and reasons for "affordable advice" she needs.
exactly, and ASIC read all our comments and do the exact opposite. they don't want financial advisers to exist.
and we are happily obliging by leaving, 5000 pa won't be long before the number count is 0
what i am worried about is that after the number count of advisers gets down to 0 they will still blame us for being selfish and leaving
I really wanted to submit my thoughts. I wanted to be optimistic and hope that this was a real review. But when I started the submission, all 26 pages, each with multiple questions that were free text, I had to 'save and exit' after an hour of typing. Why can't there be a shorter submission process for those of us that have a couple of ideas???? I think the submission process is only designed for academics and licensees to use.
And just to be really clear Jane Hume - the 'save and exit' functionality in the survey DOES NOT WORK. So all my original thoughts were just binned? If you are really serious about LISTENING TO THE ACTUAL FINANCIAL PLANNERS WHO YOU ARE ALL SO BUSY DECIDING HOW WE SHOULD RUN OUR JOBS WITHOUT OUR INPUT then give an extension of time just to us, and a simpler submission process that actually works. To proceed without our input is a joke. And I would like to see the statistics of each category of respondent, so we can see this time if the academics or Licensees are the ones giving you uninformed opinions that are making us all leave in droves!
It is easy to be cynical about this. I am as guilty as anyone.
However, if we don't make submissions, we can't exactly complain about the outcome if nothing changes. We can't just leave it up to the AFA and FPA. We all need to get involved. The future of our Profession depends on it.
You'll need to set aside a couple of hours though. It is quite a detailed questionnaire!
I wonder who ASIC is paying $10,000 to to put in a submission this time, because I know it wasn't me. :(
Sorry Jane, I am too busy dong my Ethics course, you know the one. So far I have learnt that all partisan politics should be outlawed.
Sorry - don't have time to gift to ASIC for free. Most market research companies pay for the completed survey. ASIC pays "researchers" for input but wants my input free of charge. This is a joke.
Add new comment