The language of the LICG, especially in its most recent member update, extols the virtues of fighting for the rights of the consumer, the “ill effects” of LIF of “evidence based” facts and the “basic democratic rights” of members and irrefutable evidence of the shortcomings of the legislation.
There is indeed passion within the LICG. We must not doubt that. We in fact should not deride it. Passion in times like this is critical. Even when, however, it is misdirected. The current arguments of the challenge to the rights of advisers, the failure of leadership of industry bodies to represent their constituents and the challenge to leadership of those very same bodies is an all too familiar story throughout history. It is a shame that we as a collective, as an industry, as a species do not learn histories lessons well
You see this type of rhetoric is characteristic of any period of change. It is actually natural when the status quo is challenged. It reminds me all too well of another time in history. 1964. Specifically the United States Civil Rights Act of 1964.
After Kennedy’s assassination, President Johnson sought to maintain the promise and pass legislation that would see the passing of a bill that outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. At that time the most fervent opponents were 18 “Dixiecrat” senators from the South, who labelled the legislation “unconstitutional, unnecessary, unwise and extend beyond the realm of reason”. This opposing block sought to break the legislation by blocking it “filibustering” it, over weeks, including an address by Senator Robert Byrd of some 14 hours. The bill ultimately passed, and never in history had the Senate been able to muster enough votes to cut off a filibuster on a civil rights bill.
Why fight it so hard? The world had changed. The South good ole boys, Jim Crow way of doing things was something they wanted to protect.
While the core topic is remarkably different, the similarities in process are the same. Something is changing and needs to. A group protecting its interests does not want to change and is clothing that in democracy and the rights of consumers. Leadership is questioned and challenged. But as President Johnson pondered in 1964, “A president’s hardest task is not to do what is right, but to know what is right.”
So in the current argument what is right? As Tom Reddacliff wrote on 2 September[1] “advisers can focus that energy on a business model that will have less reliance on legislation and life insurers in the long run, and jump on board the first glimmers we’re seeing of product and technology change from life insurers and the underlying advice processes”. Ian Knox challenged us[2] “The whole planning industry is on the right wave at the moment and arguing about the need for a longboard isn’t what’s needed in the world championships”. And our industry bodies are on the abyss of losing it all, “The association would lose years of hard earned respect and relevance”.[3] And someone we have not heard from for a while wrote back in February 2016 “I know you are battle weary. Your livelihoods and business model and retirement plans and careers have been challenged and shaken and in some cases ended. It has been awful. I get it. But it is now, in this moment as the legislation hits parliament that you need to say “enough now”. And look deep into your business and shift it. Do it for you, your families and your clients.”[4]
The answer is not to destroy the establishment. The answer is not to fracture the advice community. The answer is to hold the ship steady whilst charting a new positive course. That’s action, that’s in the best interests of consumers, and with a strong and intact association we as a collective can shape the change for real benefits for consumers by leveraging that position of power to shape the agenda of the insurance and advice industry starting with the product providers who in fact are the groups with the potential and motive to create efficiency, product simplicity and advice engagement. They will not do this from a status quo position. There is simply no motive or reason for them to do so under the conditions where a fractured association with no power and a one policy agenda team is the landscape they find themselves delivered post 15th September.
So it is vital that AFA members vote in this election. Voting is done on-line this year and you should receive E-Voting instructions via email from the AFA. Voting is reported to close at 4pm Thursday 15th of September.
Now is not the time to leave it to others to determine the outcome. You have the power in your opinion and if you have an opinion, vote, and unlike other legislative changes this industry has faced where advisers had not even read the legislation this is an issue where you should have an opinion.
Now is not the time for apathy. The US faces an abyss themselves right now.
“Donald Trump may dominate television and social media in the United States, but he’s not exactly crushing the electorate. Really, no one is. In the 26 states that have held primary and caucus elections for both parties, Republicans have cast 20 million votes, and Democrats have cast 15.1 million. But there’s a third force that has once again dwarfed both of these numbers: the great American tradition of disinterest and apathy.”
Right now, at this moment in the advice landscape, we do not need a Donald Trump Presidency. We do not need apathy. We do not need to build a wall between advisers and consumers. With only 1 in 5 Australians engaged in the advice process there is enough of a wall already. With disruptors moving into our space it is the time to be relevant and progressive and not the time to cling to processes of the past.
We need a multidimensional leadership team, such as the one currently in place. We need strong relationships with legislators at all levels, on all sides of politics and with product providers.
We need to change to evolve and grow and to be relevant to todays and tomorrow consumers.
As we stare into the abyss, we need your vote, we need your positive voices and we need you to do what is right. After all without that, what is the point?
By Ross Johnston
———-
[2] http://shedsocial.com.au/project/afa-battle-challenges-associations-relevance/
[3] http://www.linkedin.com/pulse/afa-being-defined-today-brad-fox?trk=prof-post
[4] http://www.linkedin.com/pulse/time-wake-up-disrupt-perish-andy-marshall?trk=mp-reader-card