I am not a great fan of the Investment Association, the trade body that represents UK investment managers. Its 200 members collectively manage over £6.9 trillion on behalf of clients in the UK and around the world.
Regular readers will recall my pleasure when Chris Sier was appointed to improve the disclosure of fund manager fees, https://www.fnlondon.com/articles/an-audience-with-chris-sier-the-fcas-new-pit-bull-on-fund-fees-20170804 and my displeasure when the Investment Association were asked by HM Government to maintain the naughty register of companies with more than 20% of their shareholders voting against their pay. That idea drew the ire of John Hunter, Chairman of the UK Shareholders’ Association who tweeted: “Asking the Investment Association to keep a register of ‘baddies’ has all the authority and credibility of appointing foxes to keep a register of poor builders of chicken coops!” see http://www.cityam.com/270945/shareholder-row-already-brewing-over-investment
I have started following Henry Tapper. You might like to read his latest blog “The belly of the beast” – Con Keating and the Investment Association https://henrytapper.com/2017/11/18/the-belly-of-the-beast-con-keating-and-the-investment-association/ . It highlights there is one metric, their proposed portfolio turnover ratio, which illustrates the failings of the IA’s proposals rather well. We have long been accustomed, and perhaps inured to the pleadings and lobbying of trade associations, but we do need to ask where the line lies between valid motivated belief and wilful misrepresentation.