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
Is demand for active ETPs genuine beyond outlier conversions?
As the active exchange-traded product (ETP) market continues to grow, new Rainmaker Information research asks whether demand has genuinely improved or if it is underpinned by conversions from three investment managers delivering "three exceptional months of work"?
Schroders nabs Lazard's Australian portfolio manager
Aaron Binsted will join Schroders Australia in early November as a portfolio manager and analyst after 24 years at Lazard Asset Management.
IFM targets growth opportunities with new global office
IFM Investors has opened its first office in Singapore to capture growth opportunities in a region "under allocated" by institutional investors.
HNWIs demand outperforming, mission-driven endowment funds
High-net-worth investors' (HNWIs) increasing demand for philanthropy vehicles with robust governance, a clear mission and can outperform in equal measure is helping fuel the rise of endowment funds such as the Aspect Impact Fund.
Further Reading
Products
Featured Profile
Sarah Shaw
GLOBAL PORTFOLIO MANAGER
4D INFRASTRUCTURE
4D INFRASTRUCTURE
It wasn't confidence that prompted Sarah Shaw to walk away from established investment houses and co-found 4D Infrastructure in 2015. It was something she believes is far more important: courage.







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