Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
investor daily logo

FPA clarifies Senate inquiry comments

  •  
By
  •  
3 minute read

FPA chief executive Mark Rantall has clarified his organisation’s position on the difference between 'professional' and 'commercial' industry associations.

Having been subjected to questioning by federal Senators about the structural differences between the various lobbying and industry bodies in the financial advice market, the Financial Planning Association has moved to clarify its positioning as a 'professional' association.

Recent debate over the FPA’s 10-point plan to raise industry standards has identified a schism among the financial planning lobby groups, Mr Rantall told InvestorDaily, elaborating on the comments made by FPA chair Matthew Rowe at last week’s Senate hearing.

“What has become clear through the discussion is the motivation of some interest groups, which have been established to support the commercial interest of their members. This is not necessarily unhealthy as we need a commercially viable industry to serve Australians, but not at their expense,” Mr Rantall said. 

==
==

“The FPA, by contrast, has clearly demonstrated it has emerged as a professional association representing its members’ interests by protecting the public interest. We stand with Australians for a better financial future.”

Mr Rantall said the philosophy of “unbridled self-interest” underlying the practice of some financial planners needs to change to give way to a more long-term approach.

“We are building this profession for an eternity and it is therefore critical that we elevate above the noise of short-term commercial gain to build something that will stand the test of time,” he said.

In addition, the association chief reiterated the FPA’s position that the corporate regulator should be given additional powers of suspension over financial planners.

“The profession and regulators need to be given powers and authority to act to ensure consumers are not put in harm’s way,” he said. 

“Both have received criticism for not acting quickly enough. Give them the power to take swift and decisive action when there is evidence of serious and systemic breaches of the best interests duty to clients. We must be able to take those that are destroying people's lives out of the system quickly. 

“An appeal to the AAT is an appropriate safety net for those that feel they have been dealt with unfairly.”