Conservative MP Harriett Baldwin today called for a reassessment of FSA proposals to ban commission and enforce higher minimum qualification requirements on experienced advisers as parliament debates the RDR for the first time.
She also backed a suggestion to hold a three-hour backbench debate in the House of Commons at a later date.
Baldwin, a former investment manager at J.P.Morgan, said experienced advisers should not be forced to sit further examinations to be able to continue to do their job from 1 January 2013.
Speaking at a private members' debate in Westminster Hall on the regulation of IFAs, she suggested advisers should instead be able to list their existing qualifications on their business cards, and leave it up to the consumer to decide whether to accept advice from that 'unqualified' IFA.
Baldwin also said the banning of commission would mean higher costs enforced on the end consumer, as compliance costs are estimated to be potentially as high as £1.7bn.
She said the RDR's proposals in their current guise would massively reduce access to advice, particularly in rural areas.
Baldwin said she had received "unprecedented correspondence" on the impact of the RDR in her constituency from IFAs with "unblemished" track records and years of experience.
"A lot of the advisers have been in their late 50s or 60s. I know I will not be as good at taking exams today as I was when I was at university, but I would like to think I have accumulated other things over the years, such as experience."
Baldwin also said she had received a letter from FSA chief executive Hector Sants, incorrectly addressed to a 'Mr Baldwin'.
In response, financial secretary Mark Hoban firmly backed current RDR proposals and reiterated that the FSA, not the Treasury, is in control of the structure of financial regulation in the UK.
He renewed his support for increased levels of professionalism for all advisers and highlighted the fact the current minimum requirements were the equivalent of a shift management qualification at McDonald's.
Hoban said half of advisers already meet the required level two years before the RDR is introduced and again dismissed calls for grandfathering.
"How do we know how good those advisers are? Just because they have been around in the industry a long time is no guarantee of their technical level of advice and quality."
However, he conceded the RDR will have a disproportionate impact on small firms, especially in remote areas.
"They are more likely to struggle to meet the RDR challenge but it is important to remember the RDR will apply to all advisers not just IFAs.
"There are challenges in the short term but we want the sector to grow and strengthen in the long term. The FSA also found a large proportion of the cost of RDR will be borne by larger firms. We want to give consumers access to good quality advice, delivered in a transparent way."
The debate follows yesterday's Treasury Select Committee hearing in which a number of MPs warned against the "unintended consequences" of the RDR.
What made financial headlines over the weekend?
The chairman doggedly tries to be amusing
'Profitability is almost a myth'
Active Wealth in liquidation
Cautious welcome for volatility