While the government has not yet disclosed the method of delivery for the experience pathway, it has released the submissions it received on the exposure draft legislation earlier this year.
In its submission to government, the Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman (ASBFEO) expressed concern that the pathway designed to help keep more advisers in business will actually disadvantage “exemplar advisers” and dilute the quality of advice.
In April, the government released the exposure draft bill to deliver its election commitment to recognise experienced financial advisers who pass the exam, have 10 years of experience, and a clean practice record.
Currently, existing financial advisers with no degree must have an approved qualification by 1 January 2026.
The ASBFEO argued that while it supports the introduction of a transitional arrangement for experienced financial advisers to meet education and training standards, it believes that “striking an appropriate balance between flexibility and rigour in education requirements is imperative to maintaining high standards of advice”.
“The government should consider requiring advisers under the transitional arrangement to complete additional hours of continuing professional development,” the office said.
“We acknowledge the need to appropriately recognise advisers’ long-term experience and commitment to compliance obligations in lieu of tertiary education. However, the loosening of the education requirements as one of the four education and training conditions outlined in the Corporations Act risks disproportionately disadvantaging exemplar advisers and diluting the quality of advice.”
The ASBFEO said that since additional requirements for standard two (exam) cannot reasonably be imposed and standard three (experience) is already leveraged, “we suggest that additional hours of continuing professional development be implemented through the existing development requirements in standard four to further strengthen the integrity of education standards for financial advisers”.
The experience pathway was introduced to Parliament mid-June.
According to the bill’s explanatory memorandum, there are 10,030 practising advisers who were first authorised in 2011 or earlier, which is the cut-off date for eligibility of the pathway.
Citing data from the Association of Financial Advisers (AFA) and the Financial Planning Association (FPA) prior to their merger, the government estimated about 6,520 advisers with 10 years of experience would benefit from the experience pathway as they have not yet met the education requirements to remain an adviser.
It also estimated that 2,086 advisers were not intending to remain in the industry after 1 January 2026.
In a speech to the House of Representatives at the time, Financial Services Minister Stephen Jones said: “By better recognising the experience of long-serving financial advisers, the government is providing a pathway for experienced advisers to remain in the industry.
“This means that new entrants have the benefit of their experience through mentoring, through supervision and through employment. It also means that more Australians will have access to financial advice than would otherwise be the case.
“The government is committed to an advice industry with strong professional standards that give Australians access to high-quality financial advice and to do this by not creating unnecessary barriers to entry, ensuring financial advice remains a career of choice.”
So, the Greens party are not the only folks prepared to throw out the good in pursuit of the perfect! Judging by some of the elitist comments in this article, some people have a highly inflated idea of their own worth to clients
How can it ‘dilute’ if experienced advisers are already in the system? Likewise, I would pick a vastly experienced tradie, doctor, dentist or lawyer over a degree qualified newbie everyday of the week.
Think this muppet knows not of which he grandstands.
Absolutely. Why should Hippocrates have to get a formal qualification to operate on someone because he’s be around for ever so would know everything he needs to.
Ho-hum. Another obscure mob wanting to feel important. Reminds me of the haters on twitter. Tell me, ABSFEO what will dilute the quality of advice to a greater extent, allowing masses of unqualified call centre staff employed by super funds & banks etc to provide critical super/retirement advice to unknowing members/clients or allowing existing advisers with more than 10 years & a clean record etc to carry on subject to all of the legal & professional standards required? Crickets.
The Ombudsman is Bruce Bilson, the former federal Coalition minister for Small Business. The government he was part of, utterly gutted our industry. And now he’s got another cushy job on the taxpayer’s tab – in addition to his parliamentary pension. Talk about failing upwards. .
Who the hell is ASBFEO? Sounds like yet another government funded front for career activists, who have no understanding of the real needs of the people they are supposedly representing. Like CHOICE or CALC.
If ASBFEO really does represent the needs of small businesses, how about standing up for the thousands of small advice business that are being persecuted by regulators and ripped off by big financial institutions?
With my over 20 years experience, I have sacked advisers with degrees that did not know the basics or how to apply the knowledge. A Degree gives you a piece of paper that proves you can study, does not prove you can apply this knowledge or even that you understand the rules and regulations.
Obviously the people at Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman (ASBFEO) don’t seem to know that existing advisers have onerous Continuing Professional Education requirements, as a condition of our PI Insurance. CDE far in excess of many other professions. I think I have clocked up over 70 hours this year alone – which leaves little time for time wasting expensive University Units that are often next to pointless.
What does the experience pathway do for me?
It allows me to exit our profession in a timely fashion. What do I have to offer new entrants into our profession – it is 41 years of experience. I have an issue with the Ethics Exam as it is all about answering the questions in a particular way and not about Ethics at all.
What is Ethics?
Ethics is treating our clients in a manner that we would like to be treated. We are here to serve our clients fairly and honestly and if we make a mistake, the first person we tell is our client and the next thing we do is to tell them what we are going to do to fix this mistake. Ethics comes from the top and the business owners must set the Ethical Standards for the staff to follow.
We are here to teach and graduates have a lot to learn before we would allow them to give advice to clients.
When you go to your doctor, who would you prefer to consult with a Doctor newly graduated or a doctor with many years of experience?
Every profession in Australia recognizes prior learning except for financial planning. Now it does too.
I respectfully feel that the ASBFEO may be “shooting from the lip ” with no valid reason to do so.
The retention of experience will more likely maintain the high standards of quality advice rather than diminish/dilute it.
I doubt that any “exemplar” Adviser (whatever that may mean) would be in the least bit disadvantaged or concerned
And, as for the suggestion of More continuing professional development hours for non exemplar Advisers? really?
Lazy advisers will always find a way to justify why they need not bother with formal academic qualifications whilst simultaneously bemoaning the state of our “profession” and hence the consequences of regulatory enforcements. Imagine if a doctor / lawyer decided to rely on work experience.
totally agree – there’s still time for the lazy one’s to step up and complete education requirements – but they are choosing not to – whinge, whine and complaint – “it’s all too hard” – well give up and leave
Completely agree.
It seems that Stephen Jones and the Albanese Labor government want to ensure that financial advisers are viewed in the same vein as call-centre staff at industry super funds.
Ensuring financial advisers are not a profession, thereby ensures call-centre staff can provide financial advice.
Cunning strategy. Makes perfect sense. We should have stuck with the degree requirement.
Exactly. I’m not going to diminish the value of experience but life experience tells me that would be just silly. But experience should be over an above universal compulsory qualifications.
You reckon if every single adviser did a new degree every ten years, 100 CPD points per year, spent half the year a Phd and the other half year in Ethics, Jones would then not allow call-centre staff to provide advice?
That’s strange, I can never recalling the name of the ASBFEO ??? standing up for the well being of small business Financial Advisers when they were getting adversely discriminated against for years and experienced, quality Advisers were crumbling under the weight of irrational & unworkable legislative impost, suffering from significant mental illness issues with some taking their own lives because their their business, self confidence, retirement plans and destruction of self worth had been decimated.
Where was the ASBFEO ??? then or is that a topic that is too difficult to deal with ??
Utter rubbish..
Scare-mongering . Many of those benefiting from experience pathway are holders of related degrees and in some cases more highly qualified than those who have undertaken recognised degrees…”dilute” advice quality…so incorrect… do your homework before stating your unqualified opinion please
“Exemplar Advisers” are all products of practice and experience, not education. IMHO Education in this space needs to ensure the minimum knowledge requirements are met, nothing more – that is where “practice” takes over.
Anyone who assumes a good adviser is made in universities or educational institutions is perhaps undercooking their own ideas.