With the profession “left in limbo” for the duration of the election campaign, the Financial Planning Association of Australia (FPA) expects action on education standards to be the “first order of business” for the incoming financial services minister.
Welcoming the appointment of the new Labor government, led by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, the FPA issued a statement on Monday expressing its readiness to “effective collaboration” on the pressing issues affecting the financial planning profession.
“Congratulations to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and his government on their appointment and we look forward to working with the new Minister for Financial Services on matters of vital importance to the financial planning profession,” FPA chief executive Sarah Abood said.
“We are expecting the new government to quickly deliver on its election commitment to provide much needed certainty to the profession on education standards, including providing for a framework to better recognise relevant experience.
“We have already had good engagement with Stephen Jones on this and other issues in the past, and we look forward to working further with the Albanese Labor government,” said Ms Abood.
Ms Abood also stressed the FPA’s willingness to continue to work with all stakeholders on policies and initiatives that contribute to affordable financial advice for all Australians.
The FPA earlier prioritised a number of issues for the 47th Australian Parliament to address, including the Australian Securities and Investments Commission’s (ASIC) industry funding model and education standards, the creation of a Compensation Scheme of Last Resort (CSLR), better regulation of ‘finfluencers’, and tax deductions for the provision of financial advice.
The creation of a CSLR has been cited as “a high priority” by the association, which has also demanded that its design and implementation ensure that consumers are covered for the full range of matters considered by AFCA including managed investment schemes. The FPA is also expecting the government to bear the costs of the establishment and any legacy claims relating to the scheme.
Moreover, the FPA is calling for “sensible measures” to improve the affordability and accessibility of financial advice, such as reducing regulatory complexity and duplication as well as providing Australians the ability to claim a tax deduction for the provision of financial advice, regardless of the stage in the advice process.
Finally, the FPA has called on regulators to take more action on ‘finfluencers’ to ensure the same rules applies to all those offering personal financial advice, no matter what the platform.
The most pressing need is a reduction to red-tape & ridiculous over-blown need to document the reasons for every decision advisers make.
Look at the most recent waste of time in TMD’s. This is one of the worst things ever imposed, what purpose does it serve? A box ticking exercise of the worst kind. Every adviser knows what products go with what style of client, conservative clients do not get recommended 100% share funds…doh. But hey, let me check the TMD first…
As for education standards, these should not be watered down. A full bachelors degree is 24 subjects, at worst an existing adviser has to complete a maximum of 8 subjects (and that’s only if they have the absolute minimum quals of a 4 unit diploma course). So existing advisers are being allowed to cut two-thirds off the requirements for new advisers entering the industry/profession. If that isnt acknowledgement of experience, CPD & training then i’ll eat my shirt…
FPA renewals are coming up in a month and the benefit of exemptions to TPB requirements is now redundant. How many FPA members will still see a reason to renew?
Those who completed the CFP course have seen it discredited and devalued by FASEA due to the grubby grandfathering arrangements of the past. The FPA has been far more focused on defending that dodgy deal than defending the high standard of the CFP course. Why pay good money to retain a designation that has been so significantly devalued?
The FPA has also been a complete failure as a lobbyist, which is supposed to be their primary benefit to members.
Come 1 July the FPA is likely to see a massive drop off in well educated advisers from non institutional practices, who no longer see any point in membership, and have lost hope in the FPA becoming a genuine professional association.
FPA why don’t you get together with the AFA, TAA, SMSFA, IOFPA and any other FP association I might have missed as a matter of urgency and then go the new government as a UNITED voice with a list of must have and a list of would like to have items and suggested timeframes to implement? Calling out like you currently are as just one association that does not represent all licensed financial planners/advisers is akin to yelling at the umpire at a football match attended by thousands expecting them to firstly hear and then secondly act upon what you are saying…
TAA and SMSFA are really product associations not adviser associations.
Couple more associations to add…
FINSIA and SIAA
With fragmented representation and the different professional bodies we will achieve nothing. We have to unite first in order to be able to have a strong voice towards the governemtn. So FPA, back to the drawing board, your highest priority should be to sit around the table with the other professional bodies representing us so you are united in your approach. We have been the victims of this fragmentation for too long. Education standards, fine, but reduction of unnecessary and conflicting legislation, removal of red tape, clarity by ASIC is what we need to survive. FPA still has their priorities wrong…
All this will do is reward people that are too lazy to meet the new standards and open the flood gates to lazy operators that want a handout. Best the government stops making changes and just leaves us alone for the next 10 years, so we don’t have to constantly change our businesses and adopt every 6 months a new piece of legislation that only adds to red tape, cost and complexity.
Labor pushed for the royal commission to be implemented in full, now the train wreck has occurred with the industry, as forecasted by the industry, they have to live with the outcome.
The only reason they want to drop the standards is due to the industry funds probably having a hard time recruiting advisers to product push their super funds. Can’t wait to see the carve-outs and how they focus on this area to give them a free-kick.
Stop tinkering with super and our industry everytime you touch it you only make it worse.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. It is not his first order of business. The education requirements have been known for years. The first order of business is to reduce the ridiculous amount of red tape and double and tripled layered compliance. Seriously, this industry is like the twilight zone !
Wrong again, his first order of business will be to craft very good reasons/excuses for not implementing ANY of his promised changes. The reason being is that his Industry Super overlords and unions to which labor is beholden will simply not allow advisers to get anywhere near building their business back again. Too much competition for industry funds, you see.
The FPA has a new President and CEO. What is their first order of business? I hoped it would be removing lingering stains of a questionable past such as grandfathered CFPs and corporate membership payments. But there has been no indication of any progress in that regard. Quite the contrary in fact. The FPA is now allowing grandfathered CFPs to retain their undeserved designation in retirement. I predict the FPA will cease to exist long before the last of the grandfathered CFPs.
No FPA, it is the inefficiency of FP administration and resulting costs to business and customers that is the primary issue to be dealt with first. Others have had plenty of time to re-educate.
This is going to be very interesting indeed.
Whether Jim Chalmers as Treasurer has any appetite for sensible reform will remain to be seen.
We need to remember, Labor see the Industry Funds as a source of revenue.
They are the end recipient of the redirection of funds from Industry Super, channelled through Trade Unions.
They treat the ever-accumulating FUM under Industry Super as a war chest.
It will take a completely different mindset to alter an ingrained philosophical view.
FPA and AFA hid or played along with the big dealer groups and insurers all this while and suddenly coming to the fore, realizing that like the Libs who abandoned their base, the FPA and AFA could get turfed out too 🙂
FPA too little too late. You had your chance ages ago and let the industry down rather badly.
BANK BANG BANG…the sound of the FPA’s war drums. been hearing it since 2002. Give it a rest and let your members earn a living without having to listen about all the nonsense all the time.
I seriously dont know why the FPA bother when all they will do is pander to the governments and their larger supporters whims. I guess though even an industry dinosaur needs to be seen to be doing something.
Not a very good look for the advice industry to claim the most pressing issue is a reduction in education standards.
The degree requirement has probably been known for over a decade now.
I really do not believe the industry has an issue with degree or equivalent standards. The method, time line and the absolute stuff up with fasea are the issues. Fasea was a knee jerk reaction without consideration to its implementation and more so the fact that the standards were a dogs brekky. The standards were rushed and confusing.