Financial services training company Mentor Education said yesterday in a statement that the government’s proposed adviser education standards should only apply to comprehensive advisers, and not “overreach” to those whose services are limited to risk or SMSF advice.
Speaking to ifa, Mr De Gori said these comments are “wrong”.
“I think it’s dangerous to start exempting people from different education standards. That is counterproductive. It is not in the interest of consumers and it’s not in the interest of fostering a proper profession,” he said.
“I think anybody that is authorised and licensed to provide personal advice to a consumer, irrespective of whether it’s limited or specialised in a particular area, has to be held to the same education and training standards.”
As an example, Mr De Gori pointed to other professions, including doctors and lawyers, who go on to specialise in areas after meeting the minimum standards.
“Everybody has to do the same core competencies and training before they then become a specialist,” he said.
“It should be no different in financial planning.”
Asked when the draft legislation on new education standards will be introduced into Parliament, Mr De Gori said it will likely be delayed.
This also includes the establishment of the independent standards-setting body, which was set to start operating on 1 July.
“The priority of the government is the budget and the election at the moment. With the timing and the election, it looks like it’s probably not going to happen until after the election,” Mr De Gori said.
“The FPA will be pushing ahead with this as soon as the election is done and dusted. This is not going to go away but yes, it’s being delayed because of the political cycle we’re in.”
The seller of courses is not happy.
No surprises here hence why I and every adviser I know will never be an FPA member.
Proudly non FPA.
After nearly 30 years of risk advising, I still do not want to join the FPA. And I probably will resign from the AFA and let it flounder on all those NAB advisers required to join one or the other. Compulsory “professional association” membership requirements is just another marketing ploy by a bank
Lets face it the FPA was originally formed and funded by the big tied life offices as an upmarket strategy to take their advisers away from the “old lifey “image. And while the FPA & the AFA continue to receive CONFLICTED sponsorships from insurers and fund managers, they cannot be a professional body
A degree will not improve my capability and skills as a risk only adviser, particularly as there is no degree available with majors in insurance. And ethics is an attitude founded on character and values, not something you acquire with a course
Here’s a quote from Amanda Vanstone which is relevant to the debate- “A degree merely tells us the graduate is capable of learning and has acquired a mandated level of knowledge on a limited subject at a particular time. Ethics and decency don’t come with the certificate “
Once again FPA out of touch with the people it’s supposed to represent.
If we all need degrees I gather FPA can provide at a cost???
No wonder this industry is in so much trouble.
While I agree with what the FPA is trying to achieve by setting a minimum criteria, they have had a lot to say about vertical integration and the separation of wealth arms from banks etc. The same should apply to them. They now need to decide if they want to be a professional industry rep like the AMA or a training authority. They cannot have their figure in both pies. If you are going to use doctors and lawyers as your reference, you also need to look at their professional bodies as reference Mr De Gori…
I don’t often agree with the FPA, with this issue though I’m fully on board. And before I get howled down, my financial planning discipline is Risk.
Hey Dante, I hate to burst the bubble you live in but planners are. Toning like doctors or lawyers so you argument if so flawed it’s not funny.
To say that education is everything is ridiculous and to imply an adviser is not good enough unless he has a degree is laughable.
You then sir as the head of the FPA need to have three degrees(accounting, law & economics) an MBA & CFP because anything less from our leader is just not acceptable. You need these Dante or else you must resign sorry.