View more on these topics

Nic Cicutti: Apfa has failed in the political lobbying game

Cicutti-Nic-2014-MM-700.jpg

 Are lobbyists too powerful a force in governmental – and financial regulators’ – decision-making processes?

This is the question Money Marketing posed in its last issue, using the Freedom of Information Act to look at the ministerial diaries for the Treasury, Department for Work and Pensions and the Department for Business Innovation and Skills, as well as senior FCA executives.

Money Marketing reporter Steve Tolley uncovered 613 contacts between ministers or senior regulators and financial services firms or trade bodies. 

The Association of British Insurers notched up 33 meetings, matching the British Bankers’ Association. Chartered accountants trade body ICAEW achieved 26 meetings.

Equally significant were the meetings with large financial institutions such as banks, insurers, accountants and investment houses, which racked up hundreds of officially recorded get-togethers between them.

In contrast, Apfa met with FCA chief executive Martin Wheatley just twice. In Apfa’s defence, its director general Chris Hannant says the trade body meets with lots of other Treasury and FCA officials. Presumably Hannant believes none of the other organisations ever meet with those officials too. 

The Money Marketing research is both intriguing and tantalising. The temptation is to assume lobbying – and the money needed to pay for it – buys influence.

There is a lot of truth in that – if there was not, why bother to lavish hundreds of thousands of pounds on lobbying firms to organise meetings and cosy get-togethers for you?

But the way these things work is much more nuanced than that. For lobbying to be effective, you need a combination of three things. One is access, with some sections of the industry finding it easier than others to be admitted into the politicians’ and regulators’ offices.

The second thing you need is a strong argument. The days of sitting opposite a minister, sharing a few public school reminiscences over a good claret and agreeing revisions to government strategy based on little more than a few common prejudices are long gone, if they ever did exist.

What matters now is preparation – the meticulously prepared and expensively assembled research document, handed over solemnly to the minister who passes it to a civil servant to report back on.

The research might be slanted, the questions asked and the solutions proposed might be driven by industry and business interests, but at least it offers the illusion of thoroughness and careful thought.

The third thing any successful lobbying effort needs is to go with the flow of public opinion. I am not saying there is no point in lobbying for an unpopular cause, or against a popular one. Indeed, in those circumstances it could be even more important to gain access to ministers or regulators. 

But if you are lobbying against public opinion you will need to work three times as hard to gain any traction and, even then, there is limited hope of completely winning the day. An example is the ABI’s unsuccessful attempt to persuade the Treasury to allow its members to offer “impartial” advice over future pension options. 

Which brings me to two further, related thoughts. The first is it would be interesting to know how many meetings were held between consumer groups such as Which? and the same ministers and regulators.

My personal guess is there were far fewer in comparison but they were by definition much more in tune with public opinion and therefore harder to ignore than companies which pay through the nose for privileged access.

My final thought is for poor old Apfa. The bitter reality is over the past 10 years Apfa has increasingly failed in the lobbying game. Its predecessors Nfifa and Aifa were led by skilled operators who knew the value of good headlines and sympathetic coverage by the consumer media.

They were seen as part of the pro-consumer trend – truly independent financial advice rather than commission-driven sales tactics had strong resonance with the public.

The problem for Apfa is its commitment to genuine independence has become blurred and there is no effort made to truly differentiate its members from any other financial salesperson.

Even worse, Apfa has become increasingly forced to focus on corralling a declining membership by promoting short-term populist policies at the expense of a broader vision for the advisory sector. 

Before Apfa will be listened to again in the corridors of power it needs to form alliances with organisations it would previously have spurned, such as Which? and Citizens’ Advice.

But it can only do so if it is fully committed to a transformed and more professional sector of independent advisers, promoting their value and their services among the public.

Perhaps Apfa should consider merging with one of the other professional bodies in the sector, creating an organisation that combines a commitment to increased skills and qualifications with the lobbying needed to advance its members’ interests. 

The alternative is Apfa’s continued slide into irrelevance, listened to by no one, its few remaining members included.

Nic Cicutti can be contacted via nic@inspiredmoney.co.uk

Recommended

Simon-Chamberlain-gestures-during-a-speech-700.png
3

Succession sell-off could see group divided

Consolidator Succession says it would be open to dividing the group and selling it as three separate firms when it comes to selling the business. The umbrella Succession brand houses three divisions: a corporate benefits arm; financial planning business Succession Wealth Management, targeted at clients with more than £100,000 in investable assets; and Succession Financial Management, which advises primarily […]

Data-Corporate-Finance-Business-Pen-Graph-Growth-700x450.jpg

UK recovery set to slow in second half of 2014

The Confederation of British Industry expects UK economic growth to slow in the final six months of 2014 but maintains its 3 per cent forecast for the year. The economy grew by 0.8 per cent in the first two quarters of 2014 but the business trade body predicts this will drop back to 0.7 per […]

Careful-Research-Business-Finance-Paperwork-700.jpg

Danby Bloch: Fast track to a risk register

Every business should have a risk register setting out the main risks the organisation faces and how it is dealing with them. A financial advisory business needs it more than most because of its regulated position. It is a fair bet that most IFA businesses do not have such a document, so here is a […]

Quiz

The Technical Quiz: 4 September

Question one Bill’s designated funds for capped drawdown vest on 5 June 2011. What is the theoretical maximum income he can withdraw in October 2014/15 without tax penalties? A) 100% of the basis amount B) 108.33% of the basis amount C) 120% of the basis amount D) 150% of the basis amount Question two In […]

UK Equities: looking past short volatility

By Mark Martin, head of UK Equities, Neptune With markets facing numerous challenges this year, Neptune’s Mark Martin, manager of the UK Mid Cap Fund, and assistant manager Holly Cassell explain how they look past short-term volatility to focus on maintaining a strong long-term performance record. Read more here Important Information – for investment professionals only. […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 7 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Hit the nail on the head there Nic, a completely toothless and out of touch organisation. I’m amazed they have lasted 15 years, I cancelled my membership years ago. Maybe if they stood up for their members then a bit of respect would be due but sadly I simply see them as FCA Lapdogs now, more’s the pity!!

  2. Christopher Petrie 4th September 2014 at 12:26 pm

    I agree. When AIFA dropped its support for IFAs, it dropped its whole raison d’etre. Nothing more than a mouthpiece for nationals and restricted networks these days. Even SJP won’t have anything to do with it.

    Closure seems inevitable because it’s useless for the IFA sector.

  3. Over to you Neil…

  4. I was a bit miffed when I saw the latest release with APFA crowing about their 15 year anniversary.

    APFA has only been running for a couple of years. It is entirely misleading to claim to have been running for 15 years. They are not the same entity as they are no longer the representative of the exclusively independent sector.

    It is as if the FCA would claim to have been running for 29 years as the inheritors of FIMBRA onwards.

    Obviously APFA don’t agree with this view, but I still think it is valid.

    That’s not to say that I’m anti APFA – I still believe they have a place – if only to help us all keep abreast of the Regulatory environment. I do agree that they have and will continue to have difficulty altering or changing that environment, for the very simple reason that the Regulator is an unaccountable body. If the TSC can’t make headway in this direction why does anyone assume that APFA can?

  5. APFA’s a bit like a political party seeking re-election on the basis of a two page manifesto and refusing to discuss the myriad of other issues which ought to be included. I’ve listed numerous questions in an e-mail to Chris Hannant but received no response whatsoever. APFA witters on about making the FCA accountable yet itself refuses to be accountable to those whose support it wishes to court. Hardly inspiring.

  6. The regulators don’t listen.

  7. Of course where Nic is spot on is the fact that they ditched Independence – but that was at the behest of the people who pay the wages – the big boys.

    As a matter of record I had proposed a merger in Steve Gay’s days when they were all in a blue funk about their solvency. (it should be on record in the Minutes). That was received like a dose of Ebola. The logical choice would have been the IFP, but the big boys and the vested interests didn’t fancy that because it meant INDIVIDUAL memberships and they would have lost their leverage (and most of their members wouldn’t have stumped up anyway).

Leave a comment