No, it doesn't. Advisers have been caught red handed many times steering small net worth clients into bad investments to provide cannon fodder profit for their connected clients. I agree that removing government completely from the equation is the best solution, but they are already far too involved. The best motive is not some government imposed fiduciary relationship-- it is profit. Let the adviser get paid ONLY as a percent of NET PROFITS on the account annually, no more of this percentage of your portfolio crap. This is how it was done before the government got involved, and is the best by far. The adviser doesn't eat until you do, and is strongly motivated to be creative and find ways to make you both money.
Now they just go for the biggest pot of gold and make a fortune, win or lose; without government fiduciary requirements there is NO motive for them to make money for the smaller client. They love older clients with no financial acumen, because then they don't even have to work the big accounts. I used to assist older members of my church with large portfolios to independtly asses what their financial advisers were doing for them; you couldn't believe it. They were under performing inflation and telling them they were doing fine.
You missed the part about due diligence. Also the greatest criminal organizations in history have been governments. If you think more regulation is a panacea for investing I fell sorry for you. I’ll take my chances in the free market thanks.