Counsel assisting the royal commission Rowena Orr QC questioned the FPA’s disciplinary procedures and in particular the role of the complainant and the granting of confidentiality to members undergoing a disciplinary hearing by the association’s Conduct Review Commission.
The questions stemmed from the case of Sam Henderson, a former member who has a complaint filed against him by former client and Fair Work commissioner Donna McKenna.
Ms Orr also questioned whether Mr Henderson – who once MC’d the FPA national congress and invited FPA chief executive Dante De Gori to appear on his Sky News Business television program on multiple occasions – received preferential treatment from the association, a charge echoed by a former member in the days following the testimony.
In its supplementary submission to the royal commission, the FPA has defended its dispciplinary process, including the two contentious issues of member confidentiality and complainant testimony.
“There is nothing unorthodox in not affording a right to a complainant be heard, as an advocate, in respect of professional disciplinary proceedings invoked in response to a complaint,” the submission states, going on to suggest that legal and accounting industry organisations have similar protocols.
Further, the association says “mandatory publication of the name of an FPA member” in disciplinary proceedings may not assist its “protective purpose” to serve the public interest.
The submission makes clear that Mr Henderson’s disciplinary proceedings have not yet concluded and that the FPA is considering “revised terms for summary disposal”.
It goes on to admit the Henderson case could have been addressed in a more timely manner and that its management of disciplinary matters could be better.
“FPA accepts that the period of time that has been taken to date in dealing with the complaint by Ms McKenna in relation to Mr Henderson’s conduct is unduly protracted,” the submission states.
“FPA accepts that there is identifiable scope for improvement in the case management of the disciplinary process, including in particular by the imposition of more onerous time limitations on steps to be taken by the parties in the course of the investigation process and disciplinary proceedings that could improve the efficiency of the process without adversely affecting its efficacy.”
The submission blames “limited resources” for the shortfall in management quality.
A full list of the submissions made to the royal commission can be read here: https://www.ifa.com.au/news/25505-royal-commission-round-two-responses-released
The FPA has become like a leach on the planning industry. I’d say even starting to become a cancerous sore. They’ve just diversified their business to pay for excessive wages to too great an extent. They’ve become very much like a dealer group providing various services for a fee..i.e a code ethics even for TPB status. A third of their income comes the FPA congress and another third from CFP courses and a very large portion from AMP/CBA. I don’t think professionalism and the FPA go together anymore. Once I paid membership fees on the hope of being part of a profession,… but you can’t be professional and be an FPA member as well anymore.
You are a pathetic joke FPA.
You deserve your own special royal commission. Your corrupt ways and mafia tactics are nothing short of disgusting. I don’t know a single adviser or colleague who is still a member of your house of cards.
Would the last adviser please shut the FPA’s door on the way out.
Wait till the other scandals like Hendersons get uncovered.
Good riddance, you are a disease FPA.
Renewal of membership fees is due this June. I’ve also been talking to a lot of advisers and they don’t intend renewing. I’ve been a member for 20 years and I’ve always hoped we’d become a profession but 20 years on we’ve got a Royal Commission. To keep paying fees to them… I’d have to be stupid…You’re living in the 80’s FPA.
The FPA are scum.Shame on them. 12 times they appeared on his show. You make your own decision as to what’s going on here. The Facts of this case ain’t rock science. Disgusting double standards we’re seeing from these individuals.
Couldn’t agree more