AIOFP refers Dixon executive Treasury appointment to NACC
The Association of Independently Owned Financial Professionals (AIOFP) has declared it will be passing to the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) its concerns about the appointment of a former Dixon Advisory executive to a key Treasury role.
AIOFP executive director, Peter Johnston has shared with the organisation’s members an e-mail to the Assistant Treasurer and Minister for Financial Services, Stephen Jones, asking that he “why a senior manager of the failed Dixon Advisory Group, is now the Director, Financial Adviser Regulation Unit – Advice and Investments Division of Treasury”.
“Considering this person directed the Dixon advice strategy, and Dixon management were found guilty by the Federal Court for breaches of the best interests duty and failure to disclose their conflicts of interest with selling their own funds to clients, we find this rather confusing,” Johnston’s e-mail to Jones said.
“We are also wondering why ASIC, who successfully prosecuted the case did not act against any Dixon management person.”
“Then there is the notion of having a senior Dixon person inside Treasury when the CSLR decision was made to allow Dixon victims to be compensated including Treasury Bureaucrats – we also find this confusing,” Johnston’s message said.
“We have no choice but to pass this information onto the National Anti-Corruption Commission for consideration (NACC).”
Johnston’s message to Jones represents a follow-on from the AIOFP’s earlier announcement that it had referred to the Dixon Advisory collapse and the actions of ASIC and Treasury with respect to the Compensation Scheme of Last Resort (CSLR) to the NACC.
It also comes as the Financial Advice Association of Australia (FAAA) has sought to ramp up pressure on the Government to hold a public inquiry into the Dixon collapse issues and its impact on the cost of funding the CSLR.
There is no doubt that the Dixon Advisory scandal smells like a bag of prawns left out for a week in 40 degree temperatures, however let’s not put all our eggs in one basket. It is highly unlikely that the National Anti-Corruption Commission are going to pick this issue up as a priority.
And to do a fact check here, Dixon management were not found guilty of anything (unfortunately).It was the company that was found guilty, and only with respect to the Best Interest Duty and the Appropriate Advice obligation. Annoyingly, ASIC only pursued the advice related issues. There has never been any suggestion that the conflicts of interests were not disclosed. Regrettably, ASIC dropped the allegations with respect to failure to comply with the client priority rule, which would have helped to prove that what Dixon Advisory did was to prioritise the generation of huge profits by related entities from the URF fund at the expense of clients.
I favour the FAAA’s calls for a public inquiry. Let’s put a real spotlight on what has happened here. Let’s flush it all out and it has to start now!
Any and every angle of inquiry, anti corruption commission, etc ALL MUST BE ON THE AGENDA.
Corrupt Canberra needs to be exposed.
Real Advisers MUST BOYCOTT on mass the CSLR Levies !!!!!
Let’s see ASIC, Treasury, Govt, etc try to ban every Real Adviser because we refuse to bail out their incompetence and corruption via CSLR Dixon’s fiasco compo.
REAL ADVISERS need to make more noise, more action, more everything to bring attention to Corrupt Canberra.
PS – isn’t funny to see this Industry Super stooge now best buddies with FAAAAAAAAAARK ? Looking for support for Uneducated Unqualified Back packer call centres hey ISA
So you are fine that the exact person who oversaw the advice and investment strategy that lead to clients losing hundreds of millions of dollars is now making rules for all good honest advisers? While she keeps her bonuses and has avoided any action for ASIC, the rest of the adviser community is being forced to fund compensation to clients she directly benefited from. It stinks and something should be done about it. Would you be happy for just a public inquiry into the CMFEU, while John Setka was employed in a senior position of the Ministry of Infrastructure? How is it different?
Whats your real name?
I would bet my first born son that the FAAA will remain silent on this corruption matter given the large consulting fees their ex Directors received for many years. $200K for a few weeks worth I believe. They don’t want to rattle the cage. This is a jobs for the boys industry.
there is clearly not enough due diligence being done by govt and treasury, but the CSLR has clearly been structured badly based on advice from unsound characters.
Seriously! Peter, NACC? You are becoming the little boy who cried wolf, everything is disastrous or a conspiracy. You’ll be say Treasury shot JFK next.
Please explain why the whole Dixon’s MIS fiasco, conflicted ASIC & Treasury employees from Dixon’s, conflicted ASIC and Treasury clients of Dixon’s setting up compo for themselves, shouldn’t be investigated by NACC ?
It is the best example ever that should be before the Corruption Commission.
Anyone that designs a process where it’s an offense to hand a Fee Disclosure Statement the day before the 12 month anniversary date of a fee arrangement has an agenda.
We know the Treasury is corrupt and has had this anti-adviser agenda for a decade, ASIC can’t be that hopeless or stupid so I can only assume it’s corruption also.