Forum Discussion
Phil-Anderson
Advisely Partner
Advisely PartnerAMA: I'm Phil Anderson, GM Policy, Advocacy & Standards at FAAA, Ask Me Anything!
Have a burning policy question on DBFO or CSLR? Join me here on Wednesday 31st July from 2pm to 2:30pm.
With 12 years of experience in the professional association space working on the development...
alex.burke
Advisely Team
Advisely TeamOh, one more if you have the time! I'll make this one shorter: I know Misha Schubert's comments were a couple of months ago now, but I'm curious as to what you think precipitated them – perhaps not hers specifically, but the general temperature before and during the passage of the first QAR bill and the comments we saw in the Senate.
To me, a lot of these talking points seem to be rehashed from the pre-Royal Commission (or perhaps even pre-FOFA) era. Why do you think the QAR reforms have reignited this debate?
Phil-AndersonAdvisely Partner
Advisely PartnerThanks Alex. I think it is important to put on record the fact that Misha apologised for that comment. It was not appropriate and it did not reflect how the very vast majority of advisers operate. The DBFO Tranche 1 debate got a bit challenging, however I think we landed in the right space and I trust all sides will accept that.
Yes there is a risk that we could go back to the bad old days of the FoFA and FoFA Amendment days. I hope that is not the case. The world is very different now and there is little doubt that the divides that existed in the past are simply much less relevant now. Our members work happily with all types of funds and we engage well with all types of funds as well. More work can be done by some funds to make them easier for financial advisers to work with, and we certainly hope that is a focus for them going forward. I think in this regard the future is much brighter than it has been and we should embrace the prospect of a world where advisers can happily work with whatever fund best suits the needs of their clients.
Related Discussions
Recent Discussions
