In its submission to Treasury this week on the Education Standards for Financial Advisers policy paper, the Financial Planning Association of Australia (FPA) has argued that streamlining education requirements “risks the professionalism journey” that advisers have undertaken over the past decade.
The government’s paper, released in December, proposed a pathway coined the “experience pathway” that streamlines the minimum education requirements and recognises on-the-job experience for individuals with 10 or more years of full-time experience.
“It’s so important to maintain the gains our profession has won and keep the trust of consumers. We cannot return to the days when a planner could technically be qualified with only a two day course, with no timeframe for that to change,” FPA chief executive Sarah Abood said.
“For this reason, the FPA does not support the proposed 10 years of experience in the past 12 years pathway as proposed.
“We believe this is an insufficient foundation to meet the objectives of raising the minimum education requirements for the financial planning profession, while also continuing to build consumer confidence in the profession.”
Instead, the FPA recommended the experience pathway only be available to professionals 55 and over and who have “at least 15 years’ experience gained in the past 20 years, and be sunset in 10 years’ time”.
The association said this will alleviate pressure on experienced advisers but maintain the goal of the proposed framework.
Further, a survey undertaken by FPA members found that 83 per cent have already met or are on track to meet existing education standards and the majority of members opposed the proposal.
Ms Abood said the current legislated framework was not executed efficiently by FASEA.
“For the most part, our membership supports an education framework which includes more recognition of prior learning and experience, which we believe FASEA failed to take into consideration sufficiently as part of their legislated framework,” she said.
“FASEA got it wrong with its one size fits all framework. Financial planners have entered with a variety of degrees and prior career experience, and they shouldn’t have to restudy what they already know.”
In a separate submission this week, the Association of Financial Advisers (AFA) argued that the “uncertainty” surrounding the proposal could see more advisers exit the industry.
I was just going to go through the comments and not waste my breath but…. I think this is all political. I’ve written to members of parliament and told them initially that the education requirements were not fair to those with experience. I have a Masters Degree so I wasn’t self Serving in my comments. I just know that I am 53 and if I had to qualify now I would leave the industry as its too bloody hard to run a business – from a growth and admin perspective, have teenagers needing help due to covid and to look after my clients who also require alot of hands on help in this digital age. Above not being in any perscriptive order. But my point is they didn’t listen and they didn’t care what I had to say. The costs alone “why am I paying anything to ASIC?” the PI cover etc… OMG…. Anyway, its too hard and for me a degree would tip me over. But….. What now for those that have complied and done the work? Is it fair to let those who have done nothing to get away with this whilst others have paid a large sum of money to get the degree and put in alot of personal time? Because the idiots in government have taken so long now to thing about our needs as an industry, I am literally on the fence… Only that i know really good planners who are looking to leave and in their 60’s am I tipped to agreeing with the proposal. Only slightly though as it isn’t fair. I think anyone with a degree should be reimbursed by the idiots who put this legislation in place if they are now going to change their minds…. Look how quick it wouldn’t pay if this were the case eh!
I think you’ll find they did listen. They just listened to the wrong people. The FPA for example put in a submission that a Degree should be worth 20 points out of 100.
We have had enough time to get in and do the work. If you are not serious enough about the profession then stop disrespecting those that went and did the study, yes I already had a degree but we ensured all our license do the work. If you can not make the standard then that is why there is one. Time for some to go. Doing something for a long time does not make you a professional
Lest we forget that 15 years of advice experience means more hours of unprofessional advice have been provided in the early years.
Advice done between 2007 and 2012 was less professional than current compliant advice. PI insurance costs increased as a result of advice quality risks from that period.
Mates doing favours for mates is where this policy idea comes from.
FASEA was an absolute waste of resources, time and energy.
The only people that benefited were the members of the board who received remuneration.
It was an exercise in how NOT to do things.
When FASEA was in regular contact with ASIC during the formation of the wording of the Code of Ethics and ASIC requested FASEA to not disclose those communications and they should not be considered as advice but guidance, it was entirely clear this was a stitch up.
…..and when ASIC paid the 2 academics up to $15,000 to submit a submission specifically weighted toward the consumer in full knowledge
that their other friends at CHOICE had also submitted a consumer based submission it was clear that conflicted interests were at play.
This has been an orchestrated and manipulated process as was clearly the case with ASIC Report 413.
and the majority of members opposed the proposal…..obviously their ISF institutional members!!
If you work in or for or own a Dealer Group that is in ANY way vertically integrated – you have immediately disqualified your self from being a member of a Profession.
Not ALL +55 year olds are used car salesman but the used car salesman/ product pushes are still around and are in sitting in that age group. The fact they can still practice with a 2 dollar diploma is laughable. Embarrassing. Anyone who thinks is ok should not be in the industry. A lost opportunity to clean up the industry.
…And the FPA wonder why no one in the industry wants to be a member anymore.
I am currently [b]54 years[/b] of age and have 30 years [i]uninterrupted [/i] experience in the last 30 years (well, 30 years in 2 weeks time). Does this mean that I miss out?
I have done the 8 unit DFP in the 90’s, been CFP for about 22 years, I passed FASEA, I am an RO on our license, Director, Adviser, up to date with all CPD, [b]never [/b]had a client complaint, done all the education for specialist work but didn’t do the Masters.
I am coming up to the last 10 or 12 years of my working life, and don’t really want to spend countless hours doing a degree that, quite frankly, won’t change anything about the way that I work, it won’t make me smarter, won’t make me more experienced, won’t make me more ethical (you either ARE or ARE NOT ethical), won’t make me more empathetic to my clients.
WHY SHOULD I MISS OUT?
FFS! No existing adviser needs to do a degree to stay in financial planning.
The original work by FASEA recognised all your quals & experience by requiring ANY existing planner to do no more than 8 units in a Grad Diploma instead of 24 units in a Bachelors Degree. So your experience & quals plus your self-professed smarts & ethics have seen you receive a two-thirds reduction (or more) based on that. At worst you are required under the current framework to do 8 units and may be able to get that down to as low as 5 or 6 units. Someone as good as u say you are should be able to knock that over in your sleep…
And at the same time, Intra Fund advice is allowed to be delivered and charged in a way which any fully qualified Financial Planner can not. Perhaps it is what it looks like – a way of eliminating the natural competition to a Product Provider retaining FUM – the Financial Planner. Also, with Financial Planners removed, certain regulators will be in a great position to demand additional funding for Consumer Education and the like.
That’s why the government proposal of Years in the Industry is much better than FPA’s suggestion of basing it on age.
There are many like you and you are right “Why Should You Miss Out” !!
I could not agree more with you here, this is exactly my scenario !
No wonder everything is a mess.
Why would you listen to the FPA – they always do more harm than good.
While I stand to benefit from the Governments proposal and would like to avoid the juggle to complete my studies, work full-time and pay out a lot of $$$.
Do we want a profession or more of the same?
Has any of the Masters Subjects taught me anything new or added value – yes surprisingly a couple have been good.
Are most a waste of time – Yes
What is the reward – a real profession.
So I will persevere even if I don’t have to and don’t want to.
Continue the path so we can become a profession that is trusted and gain all the benefits of a profession, watering down our standards will set us back far more that we gain.
I would happily study even more than I have over the decades in the industry…as soon as a university or educational organisation actually develops a course that teaches something useful. The DFPs, ADFP, Masters, CPD, Specialist Accreditations, etc, etc, etc – there is nothing taught that adds any sort of value to clients or practitioners whatsoever compared to years of on the job learning.
I’m sorry but education is like this. I acknowledge it doesn’t teach common sense but every profession has a minimum education standard. Think accounting, law or medicine. You could always become a mortgage broker.
Whatever the FPA says, do the opposite.
Too late FPA. You watched them kill the industry and did nothing. The gradual killing started in 2008. You juat collected the membership fees. Guess what? No need to renew membership june 30 22 as tpb rego grandfathered. Bye bye membership fees.
Exactly right ! .. FPA have taken my membership fees for 20+ years, have done nothing for me so they wont be getting anymore fees from me …. see you later FPA
Yup I cancelled my membership of AFA 5 years ago and they were very efficient in calling up begging me to reconsider . I didn’t reconsider .
That is one of the best ideas I have seen, basically grandfathering experience in the interim (so we are not losing knowledge), but moving towards degree qualifications for everyone in the future
Some advisers in the industry with 10, 20 even 30 years experience are the biggest risk because they haven’t adapted and learned the skills required since the door to door salesman years!
Completely agree. Set in their way. The industry has evolved. We no longer complete a Fact Find on a serviette over a meal at the pub.
Completely agree. They haven’t evolved. They were brought up in an industry that rewarded them putting themselves ahead of the client. Hard to unlearn this. The adviser coming through is trained differently.
This makes common sense so the government will reject it.
much better FPA, I read that in 10 seconds and instinctively this fits with me, good one Sarah.
I am in favour of anything that increases the professionalism of our industry. I have found that the cohort of 55+ are too set in ways and are often the bad eggs in our industry – just my experience. We need to aspire to be a profession in the same mould as accountants, lawyers and medicos. If this means increased educational requirements then so be it.
so you throw a blaket over everyone that is 55 and older and determine they are “too set in ways”. So what makes a good adviser is under 55. Now I have heard it all.
You are right, too much of generalisation but I maintain that some of them have not evolved with the industry. Please note this is my experience from dealing with the older cohort. They came through when everyone lined their own pockets first. It can be hard to unlearn this. The advisers entering in the past 5-10 year were brought up differently. Tell me the age and number of years experience of the advisers getting banned .Not sure I’ve seen many in their 20s or 30s
The FPA get something right, nice to see!
Make a decision now Government… I’m not enrolling in any further subjects until you do.
The federal Liberal government’s back-flipping is extremely unfair on advisers. On those who have started the studies, but now didn’t need to, and on those who have already existed the industry due to the education requirements, but now no longer needed to.
It is a concern that Liberal politicians treat people’s lives with such contempt.
here go the FPA once again – blowing their trumpet – consumers wont be able to afford advisers that are members of the FPA…!! fred flintstone can count rocks better than this mob….
Can’t believe I’m agreeing with the FPA. I think the age 55 and over is a great idea!! We must maintain the Education Requirements (Grad. Dip minimum) to continue to move our industry to a profession!!
Pointless study doesn’t make a profession.
Experience and great client outcomes do.
So why 55 years old? … what about a 50 or 52 year old that has been in the industry for 20+ years? …. another FPA rubbish suggestion…. Age should not be the determining factor years in industry like government proposed should be.
The FPA/AFA/FSC should have thought of this before backing O’DYER and shafting the Advice industry 5 years ago with LIF and FASEA Legislation. When are the FPA and AFA going to learn that their CEO’s should be former Advisers and NOT former institutional players? [c[size=16px][/size]olor=black][/color]
sorry, but the AFA head-honcho’s have been far and away more attuned to the profession than the FPA’s for many, many years
of course they got it wrong. They have no idea of the actual needs of consumers and the amazing experience and education that older advisers have accumulated over their ‘years of service’
FASEA gave recognition for the “amazing experience and education” that any existing adviser has. That’s why no existing adviser has to do a full degree (24 units) to stay, and why the most you would have to do is 8 units in a Grad Diploma and less if you can get credits for any education quals you have already completed.
“Got it wrong”……….you think?
Just set the rules and let’s move on. Let’s also get rid of product issuers from advice delivery while we are at it
Well said FPA!!! I completed the survey and this is the feedback I gave. This is a good compromise.