By now you’ve all read the releases from the Government in response to Ripoll (now affectionately being called the “Bowen reforms”). By now you’ve all considered the changes; and even though there are a lot of questions without answers, you’ve no doubt thought through whether you’ll be able to absorb them and how much your business will have to change to fit into the Government’s Future of Financial Advice world view.

I won’t sugar coat it: the changes are significant, not just in sheer scale of reform, but also in their application in your business. Even so, I
have faith that professional financial planners are in this for the long haul.
I am heartened by the fact that FPA members have been on this journey for some time
now, and I have met too many people with a deep passion for their clients and
their business to believe anything else.

However, I also know that some people
have considered that it’s time to jump ship; that this is one change too many
in a decade of reform that has worn them out. While it’s inevitable that we
will lose some people through change, I’m worried that some people are telling
me that they’re leaving because they’re simply tired and angry at the way
they’ve been treated over the past few years by government(s), media and groups
with vested interests.

It would be easy to dedicate this space to a
deconstruction of the reform proposals and their legal implications, but we
will have plenty of time over the next two years to digest those issues and to
consider how financial planning businesses and legislation need to change.
There’ll be consultation (probably too little) and legal opinion to consider
(probably too much); but my concern at this point in the debate is that we need
to keep the focus on encouraging the Government (and media) to reflect on how
it also needs to change. And it needs to consider the role it plays in
building a culture that values advice and that encourages Australians to take
charge of their financial future, to become a nation of self-empowered,
educated participants.

To my mind, this is the most significant gap in the
Government’s “culture war” on advice. The current Government (just like the
previous Government) appears to believe that you can impose as much change and
pain on our industry as you like, because in the end you will do the right
thing. However, every piece of research on basic change management and good
government policy development also tells us that you have to reward positive
change when it occurs; but this is the piece of the puzzle that always seems to
go missing for the advice community, and neither government has demonstrated
much capacity for rewarding good behaviour.

I think this is the biggest battle
we face – the cultural battle for government respect of professional advice. “Advice”
has become a convenient whipping boy for governments of either persuasion.
Unfortunately, the self-interest and greed that one or two firms, and a handful
of individuals, have demonstrated have given the Government a convenient target
to paint on the backs of the entire profession. It’s also unfortunate that the
outraged noise that some quarters of our own community continue to make, as an
excuse for considered professional policy, also doesn’t help convince the Government
of our seriousness; and it just means the FPA has to work twice as hard to
ensure yours is a voice to be taken seriously.

I am concerned, though, that
this is too important a battle to be drawn on simple political or media
convenience. The opportunity for financial security and confidence of all
Australians could rest on it, if the industry and Government both play their
cards right.

We will continue the work of legislative negotiation, cultural
building and assisting you in reform, but at the same time we will continue to
hold the Government to account for its part of the bargain. Reform should not
only come from industry changing, it must also come from Government changing the
message it sends to the community.

The professional community of financial
planners, and FPA members in particular, have already been on a substantial
journey of change. They already hold the highest professional standards for
financial planners in the world, and our CFP professionals already hold the
highest educational and quality advice expectations in the world.

Australian financial planning profession as a whole is the envy of governments
and regulators across the globe and yet the reform program assumes the same old
stereotypes of financial planning, tarring everyone with the same brush and in
the process frightening more Australians away from the single best service they
could access to ensure their financial future.

We will do our bit for reform,
but we will also ensure the Government does its bit. And we will communicate
our recipe for government reform in this area, including challenging them to:

1. Deliver on the promised reform of barriers to advice in all its scalable
forms. We want the Government to go beyond intrafund advice and into a review
of the Corporations Act and the compliance burden that discourages flexible,
affordable advice.

2. Encourage Australians to seek professional advice. By all
means allow product advice for the simplest of needs but also clearly
communicate the difference between product advice and professional advice.

Ensure that advice is affordable and accessible for all Australians – tax
deductibility would be a big step in this direction.

4. Stop the public
vilification of financial planning and instead acknowledge what the rest of the
world already knows – that the Australian financial planning profession is the
best in the world.

It’s important to acknowledge that the Minister has
recognised some of these issues and promised reviews and consultation to
support these issues; but we will be holding the Government to account for the
cultural leadership role it must play in delivering these reforms, just as we
encourage you to do your bit to ensure consumer confidence and trust in the

Deen Sanders is deputy chief executive and head of professionalism for the Financial Planning Association of Australia.

Join the discussion