Hot topic of the week…

by |
ASIC was questioned this week during an appearance to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee about whether or not it has been appropriately enforcing FoFA regulations. It turned into a hot political debate this week with a mixed bag of reactions.

Some of you were supportive of the FoFA laws passed under the Labor government and said they should be enforced, like investor:  “I think unions, industry funds etc should operate under Labor’s laws FOFA laws. Each year the employee gets to decide if he will pay unions fees, the union had to advise what services they provided, they have to put individuals needs first, not their own and should be liable for the outcome of union action.”

Mark M disagreed completely and said: Funny (not) how Labor politicians are now doing all this posturing about FOFA. They were the ones in power when Storm, Trio etc blew up. Why didn't they put the heat on Asic to lift it's game back then?”

The country decided last September that it “no longer wanted to be dictated to by self serving group called the Labour party who were responsible for incredible waste, stupid decisions based on warped ideology that have cost many jobs and incurred national debt that will take many years, if ever to repay”, said alleycat.

And GAB was critical about some of the provisions of FoFA: No doubt ASIC wasn't too keen in the first place to enforce a ridiculous FDS scheme or opt-in scheme where transparent and negotiated fee arrangements were already in place.”

Read the article here.


FoFA changes spurn low-cost solutions

Grandfathering amendment desperately needed

No adviser fee change after FoFA report