In an email to members, AFA chief executive Philip Kewin said the industry association welcomed the clarity the new guidance provided to advisers, but difficulties remain for risk specialists.
“One of the most common pieces of feedback that we have received is that advisers who are specialists do not see the relevance in undertaking units of study and assessments in areas that are not their specialisation and they do not give advice on, e.g. risk specialists being required to study derivatives,” he said.
“The role of the AFA is to advocate for the most sensible options for our members that enables practical pathways that recognise your previous study and experience and that enables you to study subjects that will be beneficial for your business, aligned to your interests and relevant to the advice you provide.”
Mr Kewin said the AFA will advocate for access to “graduate diploma programs that better align with the needs of specialists, including risk specialists”, which recognise their expertise.
Additionally, the AFA said it will push for alternative options for existing advisers who don’t have a ‘relevant degree’ to meet the new standards, improved options for older advisers to encourage them to stay in the industry, more recognition of professional designations and more cost-effective options.
Best news I’ve heard in a while – risk specialist courses. I hope the appropriate ‘AQF’ or whatever they call them comes into line for this too. I’ve been screaming in the media for this for ages. I’d like to know WHY it had taken someone in Phil Kewin’s position SO LONG to call for this accreditation. Maybe because Don Trapnell did it the other day. At least good to see Phil is been reading the comments in IFA, Risk Adviser et al. Why does he, the boss of the AFA, need this sort of impetus to call for something that should have been available to risk writers over a decade ago? we wouldn’t have had to waste our time doing largely irrelevant DFP’s if we’d have had specialist risk courses then. At least he’s finally woken up and is now paying attention . . . it seems . . . let’s hope.
“Advocating” is just not good enough with these people. The outcome you are proposing (which I agree with) will be “the make or break” of the AFA. How can FASEA or any other party require a “risk adviser” to achieve a qualification in an area that they are not legally licenced to give advice in? Whether they can achieve it or not is irrelevant it’s simply they are not licenced to give that advice because they choose not too.
Come on Jack, you have been around for ages and done your time and need to have a life in retirement! Take it from the younger me, it’s just fantastic.
Please push as hard as you can for this Specialist Diploma course, as I am also one of these risk advisers, of advancing years, and do not wish to leave this industry, but also will not go and do a full Fin. Planners degree. Good luck and diligence.