FOFA lobbying highlights need for united front
One of the key outcomes to be derived from the Future of Financial Advice (FOFA) lobbying effort and resultant outcomes is the need for the financial advice industry to start speaking with a single voice on key issues.
That is the opinion of a panel of experts assembled to discuss the future of the industry post-FOFA, with AMP's director of political policy Al Kinloch claiming the industry could have "won" on opt-in if it had maintained a united stance.
If it had got to 10pm on 22 March, the night FOFA was voted on in the House of Representatives, and there had been no deal done on opt-in, the legislation would have been referred to the next session of Parliament in May, he said.
The numbers in the Senate would have been more favourable at that point, with Labor numbers dwindling further since then, he said.
"In May, if you think of the numbers, we just need one person to switch over, not two - and we had [independent MP] Rob Oakeshott," Kinloch said.
Referencing a compromise struck between the Financial Planning Association, the Industry Super Network and Financial Services Minister Bill Shorten agreeing to include opt-in but with a carve-out for planners who are bound by a suitable professional code of conduct, Kinloch said "all we had to do was close ranks for another three or four hours and we would have got the result on that last argument. So a united front is better for the consumer and the adviser".
Association of Financial Advisers chief executive Richard Klipin highlighted as a key issue the costs and inefficiencies of having multiple bodies each campaigning separately.
"Is it smarter to have everyone doing their own thing or is it smarter to create a board as the accountants do?" he asked. "A lot of energy and resources have been expended; there must be a smarter, more effective way to do it."
He said margins across the board at every part of the value chain were heading south, and the ability to fund extra costs such as implementing and policing a code of conduct would cause serious Budget-setting issues.
There are enough interests that are aligned within the profession that there needs to be a single body representing all parts of the advice value chain, he said.
Head of practice-based financial planning at ANZ Wealth, Neil Younger, said he had been disappointed over the years with the reluctance of many planners to be part of a professional association, but said one reason for this was that planners were frustrated with the lack of consistency from industry bodies and the resulting lack of effectiveness in lobbying government.
"There is work to be done in getting more singular in some of our policy settings and the voice we have with the regulators," he said.
Recommended for you
The Governance Institute has said ASIC’s governance arrangements are no longer “fit for purpose” in a time when financial markets are quickly innovating and cyber crime becomes a threat.
Compliance professionals working in financial services are facing burnout risk as higher workloads, coupled with the ever-changing regulation, place notable strain on staff.
The Senate economics legislation committee has recommended Schedule 1 of the Delivering Better Financial Outcomes legislation be passed as it is a “faithful implementation” of the recommendations.
Treasurer Jim Chalmers has handed down his third budget, outlining the government’s macroeconomic forecasts and changes to superannuation.
