This body has been established to consult with the industry and set the ground rules for how advisers operate in the future.

However, the chairman of the group, Angus Dale-Jones, is trying to gag the media and stifle debate in the industry.

This is totally against the purpose of the CWG, to consult, and shows serious flaws in the composition of the group.

Dale-Jones gagging includes a refusal to respond to any questions from Good Returns. Also Good Returns intends to be at one of the CWG’s roadshow events this week and has been told it will not be able to ask any questions at any of the roadshow.

This is without a doubt a gag on the media and the right to free speech.

It is totally at odds with the group’s mandate to consult with the industry. It is a 100% U-turn on what Dale-Jones told Good Returns when he was a guest on Good Returns TV last year.

But there is more to it than a gag on the media. Dale-Jones says the CWG will not attend an inter-industry association body meeting on April 4  if Murray Weatherston attends.

This is where the problem is.

Dale-Jones has taken offence to a comment made by, and published, on Good Returns.

In the comment adviser Murray Weatherston referred to CWG member, Rebecca McClelland, as "a recent migrant". 

He also noted that she was representing AFAs and had worked for the FMA and now KPMG.

Weatherston’s comment was to ask whether she was really representing AFAs.

His comments bring to the surface an issue that has been raised by many advisers; and that is the make up of the CWG, its lack of practicing advisers and its skew to the so-called big-end of town.

Dale-Jones’s attack on Weatherston is puzzling, unless his goal is to try and silence him.

The crazy thing is that Weatherston has been the voice for independent advisers and what he calls the small-end of town. He has willingly contributed hundreds of hours to understanding  and critiquing the changes.

And all his comments on Good Returns are made in his own name.

While it is not a point he raised, McClelland is what could well be described as a recent AFA.

Her registration granted in November 2013 and it appears she has little experience at the coal face of giving advice to clients.

This is not a personal comment on her.  For the record I have never met her and make no comment on her suitability for the role.

The deeper issue, and the real problem is, the composition of the CWG. There are hundreds of highly experienced advisers in New Zealand but not one of them is on the CWG.

The group is led by a former regulator, who arrived in New Zealand circa 2008, and it has very few practitioner advisers on board.

Good Returns has previously reported that advisers have been uncomfortable with the CWG make up from day one.

This is not a personal criticism of the members of the CWG. It’s an acknowledgement the CWG doesn’t fully represent the advice industry.

The Minister needs to step in on this one. If I was Shane Jones I would be calling for the chairman to resign.