Same old, same old from the FPA. Their transparent attempt to have everyone be a member and pay them fees for which they provide zero genuine representation (except for their mates in big banking and insurance) in return.

Oh yes! And more "education" so they can flog more "training".

Ban the FPA and educate/fund consumers to use lawyers to protect them from the banks...oops...I mean advisers.

It would be funny if it wasn't so stupid.

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.

Does the FPA not understand what is happening in the regulatory landscape that it inhabits?

Has the FPA not read ASIC CP 212 and come to the conclusion that ASIC has zero interest in the financial planning industry; that ASIC has no intention of being a part of anything to do with education of financial planners or maintaining financial planner registries.

Listen to what the general thread going through all of ASIC pronouncements on financial planning. That is: If you need advice go and see an accountant or lawyer. We trust accountants or lawyers, we don't trust financial planners. Financial planners charge large fees and receive commissions for doing nothing. If you want advice on aged pensions go to the government website that is free. If you want super advice go to your super fund (which should be industry rather than retail).

As for this bleating about ASIC lacking in powers is absurd. Why does the FPA go on about this? Whose benefit does it serve? ASIC argue for higher penalties and fine tuning for its investigative arm not basic legislative powers because it already has them. ASIC has the capacity right now to take out whom it wants including the licensee if it is aware of someone doing something wrong and that person is protected from bias treatment by ASIC under the the laws of natural justice and administrative law legislation.

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.