Lawyer questions legality of FoFA amendments

Whiteley and his cohorts do not actually run a financial planning practice and don't even talk to clients directly. They are therefore totally unqualified to pass judgement on regulations which affect real Professional Financial Planners.

What this so called legal advice does not mention is that the proposed seventh part of Best Interest is open for testing in the courts due to its ambiguities and therefore firms such as Arnold Bloch Liebler have a vested interest in keeping this in the regulations to generate future business for themselves.

How is it that a member of the Liberal Party (one with no experience in the Fin Services Industry) is defending the 40 or so Industry Funds which were presumably set up to provide income streams for Unionists and ex Labor politicians in their roles as Fund Trustees/Directors, etc., and for the political purpose of using members funds for running down the high quality advisory industry in Australia, influencing share holders meetings, and influencing Funds Managers (those who accept Industry Funds money). Presumably the Hon Peter Collins is being paid very big bucks as chairman of ISA!

FOFA in turn was set up to continue the onslaught against the advisory industry, arguably the very best in the World and one which does infinitely more than simply hard sell an inferior investment product such as Industry Funds. Ignore this noise, Senator Sinodinos and get on with your job.

Also make sure that the proposed Royal commission closely examines any possible corruption in Industry Funds. Separately APRA should be checking to see whether Industry Funds meet the sole purpose test.