Hedging your bets

financial planning industry industry superannuation funds financial services industry financial planning association financial planners federal government FSC AFA FPA association of financial advisers treasury

2 August 2010
| By Mike Taylor |

There will be many in the Australian financial planning industry who, looking at the Federal Government’s changes to their industry, believe that their interests would be best served by the defeat of the Australian Labor Party at the forthcoming election.

In the opening weeks of the campaign, the Money Management blog has been the recipient of many entries imploring planners to encourage their clients to vote for the Coalition. Many others have urged the Financial Planning Association (FPA) to up the tempo of its lobbying to both the major parties.

Given the degree of change being confronted by planners and the widely-held perception that the Labor Government’s agenda has been influenced by the trade union movement and the industry superannuation funds, the level of antipathy towards the election of a Gillard Government is understandable.

However, history has shown that it is a naïve, not to say foolhardy industry or industry organisation that seeks to back particular winners during an election campaign. The history of Australian politics is strewn with the wreckage of organisations that have made such mistakes.

If justifiably angry planners want any proof of the folly of such tactics, they need only look to the 1991 federal election when, with the Keating Government seeming all but unelectable, the Housing Industry Association openly and strongly backed the Coalition being led by John Hewson. When Labor was returned to the Treasury benches, it was no secret that the HIA found it harder than most to both gain and maintain the ear of the Government.

It is on that basis that the FPA, the Association of Financial Advisers (AFA) and the newly-named Financial Services Council (FSC) will be remaining non-partisan through the election campaign, notwithstanding the fact that two of the three organisations employ the services of former Liberal Party politicians — John Brogden as chief executive of the FSC and Kerry Chikarovski as an adviser to the AFA.

Brogden and Chikarovski well understand the rules as they pertain to elections and the dangers that exist in being seen to take sides.

However, maintaining a non-partisan stance is not the same thing as remaining silent. The major organisations representing financial planners can and should be restating their policy positions throughout the campaign period.

Irrespective of which of the parties wins on 21 August, 2010, many things will change for the financial services industry, not least the make-up of the Cabinet and carriage of the portfolio. That is why it is important to ensure that the appropriate doors remain open.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

Completely agree Peter. The definition of 'significant change is circumstances relevant to the scope of the advice' is s...

3 weeks ago

This verdict highlights something deeply wrong and rotten at the heart of the FSCP. We are witnessing a heavy-handed, op...

3 weeks 5 days ago

Interesting. Would be good to know the details of the StrategyOne deal....

1 month ago

Insignia Financial has confirmed it is considering a preliminary non-binding proposal received from a US private equity giant to acquire the firm. ...

6 days 4 hours ago

Six of the seven listed financial advice licensees have reported positive share price growth in 2024, with AMP and Insignia successfully reversing earlier losses. ...

1 day 19 hours ago

Specialist wealth platform provider Mason Stevens has become the latest target of an acquisition as it enters a binding agreement with a leading Sydney-based private equi...

23 hours 52 minutes ago