Kell to chair key AFCA consumer panel
Former Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) deputy chair, Peter Kell has been named as the new chair of the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) consumer advisory panel.
AFCA confirmed Kell’s appointment on Wednesday noting that he was only the second chair of the panel since its establishment in early 2019.
Confirming Kell’s appointment, AFCA chief ombudsman, David Locke said the organisation was fortunate to have Kell join as chair of ACAP.
“He is a well-respected consumer advocate and former regulator, who has deep knowledge of consumer protection and our regulatory environment,” Locke said.
Kell said he looked forward to the role in circumstances where “consumer organisations support thousands of people every year and have unique perspectives that can help inform AFCA’s work”.
Kell is currently the managing director of Promontory Australia.
Makes sense given the synergies – ASIC and AFCA have both been anti-adviser for their entire existences
This is going go well for Advisers – NOT.
Watch AFCA, with 1% Adviser complaints make it all about Advisers being the problem for EVERYTHING !!!.
Tiring is Canberra bureaucracy
Another CHOICE CEO in a senior government position, which happens to overlook Financial Advice. They must have their own chummyclub to get these positions and I wonder how they go about recruiting them and what other candidates there were. Alan Kirkland is now ASIC commissioner on the enforcement side, now Kell is on the disputes side, which could be bad news for advisers trying to reduce their prescriptive compliance requirements. I’ll wait for Xavier O’Halloran from Super Consumers Australia to grab a spot soon too.
Another blow for advisers. One of the bright minds who brought you LIF = ignorant & ideologically blinkered. Should partner well with Kirkland.
There are arguments made by some that say that the payment of financial advice fees from super should not be allowed.
I find this position odd as it seems to deny choice to the Australian public as to how they might want to pay for their superannuation advice using their money.
In my view;
….. but this isn’t enough? Then what is enough? Does ‘enough’ actually exist?
I feel that financial advisers are asked to be professionals, (certainly are punished as if they are), but when it comes to things such as is, this doesn’t seem to be the commensurate treatment of a profession.
Has an impact study been undertaken attempting to capture what might happen if this position became policy?
Is it possible that denying people the ability to use their super to pay for professional advice might detract them from receiving professional advice?
Why should a younger Australian have to pay from their pocket today for advice with regard to an interest they cannot realise until retirement in the distant future?
Have advised clients (who consent to advice fees being paid from super) been asked their opinion on the matter? If not, why?
Great post Frank, I’d urge you to write to Sr Bragg and Antic & others somewhat sympathetic to planners raising exactly these issues:
https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Guidelines_for_Contacting_Senators_and_Members/los
Yeah, have been doing my bit with regard to that.
It’s getting ridiculous now, I’m not sure if it is incompetence or by design.
From CSLR, to RITC, ASIC levy, to Trustees maybe having to check advice documents, not to mention the single consent form that might be optional.
It feels like that everything that is happening right now is making advice harder and more unaffordable…. Unless of course you are a superfund who wants to provide ‘qualified advisers’. For that stuff it seems, yeah no worries, let’s go.
What was promised…. what was delivered? A joke. A total joke.
If this doesn’t turn around quickly, the next move has to be actively campaigning against the ALP at the next election.
Frank, I suspect by design, unfortunately.