The Financial Planning Association of Australia (FPA) and Association of Financial Advisers (AFA) announced their intention to merge only this month, but it has been revealed that the move has been in the works since last year.
FPA CEO Sarah Abood and AFA CEO Phil Anderson joined a new episode of the ifa Show podcast this week to talk about the news, where Mr Anderson discussed how long the associations have been in talks.
“The conversation started at the end of last year but didn’t really get into active conversation until the beginning of this year. We’ve done our best to keep it a secret since then,” Mr Anderson said.
“We couldn’t do that until we’re ready to make an announcement to members, but we’ve been working since then and making sure that we were as well prepared to say something publicly when the time arrived.”
Earlier this year, the industry bodies dismissed speculation that a potential merger was on the cards.
In March, speaking to ifa, AFA CEO Phil Anderson said: “The message from both bodies was that we are working closely together on a range of matters, including having joint meetings with politicians and the regulators.”
On the podcast, Ms Abood said there are a number of reasons why now was the right time to announce the merger, including the declining number of financial advisers in Australia.
“Obviously, the recent reduction in planning numbers has played a part, and it’s made us on both sides, I think, think really deeply about what is the best way to use members’ funds and how can we ensure that our members are going to continue to be represented effectively,” she explained.
“We can combine the resources of both the associations and really importantly, create a united voice and stronger advocacy for financial planners and advisers.”
The industry heads also confirmed that the “clear plan” for the new association will see Ms Abood take on the role of CEO, and Mr Anderson as the general manager.
Both the FPA and AFA will undergo extensive consultation with members and it is expected that members will vote on the proposal by the end of this calendar year.
The new association is expected to officially launch on 1 January 2023.
Listen to the full podcast with Ms Abood and Mr Anderson here.
Vote No…send both of them broke I say…it will send a message that they need to change…voting yes means more the same, the same culture, and one body that will continue to represent institutions with big member pockets. Merging is just kicking the can down the road. Perhaps out of those ashes a phoenix will arise.
The execs and staff at the FPA and AFA are just trying to save their jobs.
They are now going to be ‘very busy working on the merger’ that they will have yet another excuse for taking their eyes off their sole reason to exist – fierce and effective representation of their hard working fee paying members.
For me to join there would have to be a no sponsorship or payment from product providers rule.
Two useless organizations, out of touch with its members and the community, just make one association still out of touch.
When it comes to this merger I’ll steal a line from the FPA…. “don’t worry yet, a long way to go & let’s see what happens” , and of course finally “we’re here to support you (sell you stuff) now that changes are in”
Guess the AFA members will be able to grandfather into the CFP designation now.
Only if they pay 20 years of back CFP fees. After all that’s what the grandfathered CFP is all about. Giving a “professional designation” to people who don’t have a professional level of education – in exchange for money.
Not really relevant anymore is it Dan with the QAR likely to recommend staff of product providers be able to deliver personal financial advice – who are likely much less qualified than those with the Grandfathered CFP – but you defend that high ground.
Good luck! Much better to have one unified voice.
Irrelevant. What have either done to support our industry?! One organisation, same result
Only if they supported us during the royal commission like the mortgage broker’s association, then I might care!
No doubt this matter was done and dusted before members were consulted. Member sign-off would be seen as just a minor hindrance.