Jones reacts to QOA final report
Minister for Financial Services, Stephen Jones, has reacted to the final report of the Quality of Advice Review which was released on Wednesday.
The 267-page report was released on 8 February and included 22 recommendations on areas such as Statements of Advice, superannuation, life insurance and digital advice.
In a statement, Jones said: “Australians need access to quality, affordable financial advice to plan for their future.
“We thank Michelle Levy for her work in leading this review and producing a detailed and valuable contribution.
“Anyone with an interest in financial advice should read it and make their views known.”
The review had been handed to Jones on 16 December and he said the Government would consult widely on its recommendations, as had been requested by financial advice organisations.
“We want to see an industry with strong professional standards that’s accessible for more Australians and look forward to hearing views on achieving that goal.”
Click here to read more about the Quality of Advice recommendations.
AUTHOR
Laura Dew
Recommended for you
ASIC has banned a Queensland adviser from providing financial services for five years after failing to provide appropriate advice that was in the best interest of his clients.
Minister for Financial Services, Stephen Jones, has said it is not a “backdoor attempt” by the government to allow the new class of adviser to provide full advice.
The financial advice industry has seen a net loss after 10 consecutive weeks of net growth in adviser numbers, according to Wealth Data.
Only 11 per cent of financial advice practices have said they are including crypto products on their approved products lists, according to CoreData.
Not really a response and seems to be at odds with the treasury page which states "The Government is considering its response".
Seems that sensible progress is being made at last to help advisers and their clients. Proof is in the pudding.
Such a shame Product Providers won't be expected to provide advice in the best interest of the client - I guess it is well known that the advice is of such poor quality that no one would pay for it directly hence having to charge the collects (others) - I guess the advice is not "good advice"?