Licensee transparency far more urgent than advice registerBY LAURA MILLAN | THURSDAY, 14 AUG 2014 12:40PMEstablishing a clear and transparent standard for licensees to provide references when an adviser leaves a dealer group is more urgent than the government's advice register, the Association of Financial Advisers (AFA) chief executive Brad Fox said. Related News |
Editor's Choice
MLC AM targets EM strategy with fresh mandate
MLC Asset Management has selected a global investment manager to leverage its 16-year-old emerging markets strategy.
Digital assets on the right path: Industry
Digital asset providers have evaluated the October deadline and ASIC's consultation on the looming digital asset laws and determined that these developments mark a pivotal point on the sector's implementation journey.
NCAs unlikely to solve retirement advice gap: HUB24, CFS
HUB24 and Colonial First State (CFS) say the New Class of Advisers (NCA) will unlikely solve the retirement advice gap Australians face, noting the focus needs to be on helping reduce friction for those with complex advice needs.
AustralianSuper rolls out new investment data platform
AustralianSuper has implemented a new investment data platform designed to improve portfolio oversight, risk management and decision-making as the superannuation fund expands its global operations.
Further Reading
Products
Expert Feed
Featured Profile

David Sharpe
CHAIRMAN
FINANCIAL ADVICE ASSOCIATION AUSTRALIA
FINANCIAL ADVICE ASSOCIATION AUSTRALIA
A family man, business owner, cricket fanatic and financial adviser, David Sharpe has many facets. One of his biggest legacies, as he steps down as chair of the Financial Advice Association Australia, is leaving the profession stronger than he found it.







Both concepts are vital to the broader community for different reasons.
Brad is correct, transparency in why advisers move licensees has very good chance of "weeding out any bad apples" thus protecting the community from the few remaining unethical advisers.
But the adviser register, if constructed properly, should allow every member of the publlic to instanty assess whether "their adviser or prospective adviser" is a true fiduciary or a well intentioned but conflicted planner who serves a product manufacturer or platform provider.
Nice idea, but what about if an adviser leaves a Dealer Group who has been acting fraudulently?
What if the adviser has reported the dodgy dealer group to ASIC and no action has been taken and the fraud not uncovered even through ASIC were told exactly where to investigate?
I agree totally with Peter's second point