In a LinkedIn post, the Minister for Financial Services, Stephen Jones, said: “I’m about to introduce legislation to implement our election commitment to allow experienced financial advisers to continue to provide advice and to improve the qualification framework for the advice industry”.
Mr Jones confirmed on Tuesday, while delivering the government’s response to the Quality of Advice Review (QAR), that the QAR announcement coincides with the planned introduction of legislation this week to implement the commitment to better recognise the experience of long‑serving advisers.
“This measure will assist experienced advisers with a clean disciplinary record who have passed the adviser exam to continue to provide high quality financial to Australians,” he said in a statement.
In late May, Mr Jones said that the bill will “recognise the qualification that comes with a decade of experience, while maintaining a clean record on the adviser register”.
“There will be no sunset clause on this qualification,” the minister said.
“Mostly, this bill is providing us with time to manage the transition while we clean up the settings on education qualifications to facilitate and improve pathways for entries into the system. I’ll be doing more work on a pathway for new entrants over the second half of the year,” he explained at the time.
“This is about taking measured pragmatic approaches that protect consumers, gives them access to qualified advice and works with industry, not against it.”
The government released the exposure draft bill in April to deliver its election commitment to recognise experienced financial advisers who pass the exam, have 10 years of experience, and a clean practice record.
Currently, existing financial advisers with no degree must have an approved qualification by 1 January 2026.
However, surveys of the industry have suggested that advisers are divided on the government’s proposal.
Namely, a poll on the ifa website that asked advisers if they support the experience pathway as outlined in the government’s draft bill revealed that as many as 51.3 per cent do not, while 46.7 per cent do. Only 2.1 per cent of respondents were undecided.
The poll, which received 632 responses when it closed, is emblematic of the mixed response that the experience pathway has received.
In its submission to the government’s exposure draft bill, the Financial Advice Association Australia (FAAA) said many advisers feel “aggrieved” by the timing of the announcement.
“A key factor influencing member sentiment about this proposal is the timing of its introduction,” the FAAA wrote.
“The transition period by which time existing planners/advisers must have completed an approved qualification, commenced more than four years ago on 1 January 2019. Many existing financial planners/advisers, whose qualifications were not recognised by FASEA, have undertaken study during this period.
“Hence, some members feel aggrieved that they have invested substantial time and money in completing qualifications that now might not be required.”
Flipping the results of the ifa poll, the FAAA also revealed in its submission that it had surveyed the draft legislation with 1,197 respondents, of which 50.9 per cent said they were supportive of the pathway, while 49.1 per cent said they were not in favour of the proposal as drafted.
Finally some reprieve from the massive amount of red tape it takes to keep a business alive. Today is a great day, we have finally had a win!
With over 20 years of experience, I qualify under the proposed ‘experienced adviser pathway’ and I have two subjects remaining, but I made the decision early last year to hold off on pending the outcome of experienced pathway.
I am absolutely an advocate for professionalism, and for raising the education standards in our industry to tertiary level so that we are recognized as a professional industry. However, having endure the painful process of paying exorbitant fees, being lectured to by those with PhD’s that are 100% academically minded and exhibit ‘zero’ understanding of the practicalities and operational nature of our industry; and having been forced into Group assignments with new entrants undertaking the degree to enter the industry, whereby I have been forced to complete the entire group assignments myself in-order to pass, thus given the others in the group a free pass, and all because the curriculum provides no meaningful and practical way for these students to apply or understand what’s required, I’ve come to the sad conclusion that it’s not the setting of education standards to tertiary level in our industry that is the problem, it’s that the education standards are absolutely not fit for purpose, and are structured in a way to provide revenue windfall for the universities with little benefit for those that actually qualify in the field of financial planning.
If you do a degree in medicine, you’re no chance of been qualified after 1 yr of prac. The degree for new entrants should be completely revamped to be 2 or 3 years practical on the job experience with maybe 1 yr theoretical. For experienced advisers they should be assessed individually (case by case) and be given option to apply for RPL based on that work experience without limitation on how many subjects they can apply for RPL on, and therefore only be required to complete subjects that they need knowledge and skills training to bridge, and all subjects need to be revamped to be fit for purpose.
I’ll probably complete the 2 subjects remaining anyway to tick the box and silence the whiners out there, but gee it’s not reasonable or right to have to spend extensive time away from family and running a business to study for no knowledgeable gain, and on top of that pay exorbitant fees for the sake of ticking a box and being allowed to continue in a profession you have been in for decades.
I for one hold no grudges against those that held off and will qualify under experienced pathway. It’s the education that is not fit for purpose that is the problem here.
I simply can’t see why the experience pathway should be allowed.
I too didn’t have the time, nor energy to study a Grad Dip given was operating my own business (including changing licensee) and I and the family experienced significant health challenges, yet I completed the required Grad Dip and to an HD std too.
It’s offensive and mortifying that those who chose not to put the effort in, as required by law, now get a free pass.
In our business, advisers who have not completed the original education pathway to the highest standards are not welcome.
Class action looming for cost and time we wasted. An amount of $150,000 per adviser.
Go Jonesy, 1!
Great news for some of us..but it needs a sunset clause if there is to be any long term reward and respect as an industry for all that we have had to endure the past few years and beyond
I’m not completely clear if the advisers that completed the training are upset that they completed and paid up or that its bad for clients that we now have “untrained” advisers…and 10+ years client facing teaches you far more than a Grad Dip will ever do….and we have continued professional training ever since….
He mustn’t have a lunch where this can be announced.
Blood, sweat, tears and $$ down the drain…8 subjects for ADFP and now 6 subjects for Grad Dip after Royal Commission. If you want to become an Accountant, you have to study, if you want to become a lawyer you have to study. Could have focused 100% on Business Development and building my business instead of studying. Relieved to have the Post-Grad but not really worth the piece of paper.
Let’s expect another Royal Commission into financial advisory/planning in the next decade or two…Regardless of all this “education standard” reform circus by the govt, when I choose my financial adviser (I’m Gen X), I have always considered and will continue to consider both their education (a degree as a minimum) and experience. Having a degree at least shows that the adviser was willing to put in the extra effort for their clients and for the industry
If you’ve done the study (or are doing) then youve done it. So be it. If you havent, and weren’t intending too then perhaps you fit the experienced pathway. Whatever the camp you currently reside in, its time to move on – If you have your degree market yourself accordingly and expect more than those who dont. If the degree is worth anything youll get your rewards. If not, then youll have had a life lesson in understanding that this was all about shoring up revenue streams into the future for registered training orghanisations amongst other political machinations.
At the end of the day – further education was never about code of conduct. You are either ethical/moral/truthful or you are not. I for one have always beleived that if you have lived a clean advising life for years (this can easily be demonstrated) then why should you be penalised by those who havent. Does anybody actually beleive that these problems would cease post everyone getting a degree? There are examples daily of degree qualified professions with less than desirable employees being caught out – just look at the PWC debacle presently.
I do feel for those that invested significant time/money and stress into completing the studies but as I said now is your opportunity to benefit from that in the market place – persoanlly, when I think of my client relationships i dont think it would but I guess it may for new clients.
I just hope we all just stop slinging mud at each other – lord knows there are enough clients for all of us – opportunity isnt the issue.
Yet another case of one step forward, two steps backwards for an industry that wants to be known as ‘professional’. Haha we’re miles away!
I believe this is a positive step. Whilst there should be an even playing field from here on, someone with 10 years plus of experience would likely be more knowledgable, qualified and professional than what they would learn academically. I can attest to this having now completed a degree doing two more units than I needed to satisfy the FASEA ‘gaps’. Yes, I paid the fees, took time out of my business and put on weight mainly as insurance for when they decide to change the rules again in 10 years. I don’t want to be in my 60’s and caught out like many of other current colleagues. What a disgrace. Whilst I did learn a bit from my studies, I honestly don’t feel that it contributed to my knowledge in any meaningul way. Having said that, I now have a piece of paper I can use to stick it to my school teachers who never thought I’d amount to much! Off to book in my therapy session…….
Why do I feel like I’ve binned $50k on HECS to be a member of this ‘profession’?
What have I done with my life?
Common sense prevails.
This is a non ending fiasco, what will happen when the opposition get back into power? Sorry guys you must have a degree but not the one you spent $10,000 plus on a few years ago.
Excellent!
why?
Can I have refund for the 8 subjects that I have recently done. Sick of this industry.
Be proud of your accomplishment.
I took the risk to wait and see. First break I’ve had in the industry in 25 years.
No surprise. I think that advisers who are qualified will still be preferred by consumers over those who have simply ‘hung in there’ to get the 10 year exemption…
Should not be open ended – idea was to have all advisers equally qualified.
Why would you want a ‘sunset clause’? Either experienced advisers are competent enough to provide advice, or they are not. I could have a minimum of twenty years experience of providing advice to my clients, and on a specific date in the future you think I am no longer competent. How does that make any sense? I can’t believe I am saying this, but the government have got this right.
Who’s idea exactly?
I’m not sure I agree with the 10 year experience qualification, however I think 20 years plus [b]IS[/b] an equal qualification.
So Mr Jones, if you’re about to ‘flip’ on the Education Standard, when can I expect the refund of the $16,000 plus I paid out to Kaplan to meet the Education Standard?
I’m happy to send my Graduate Diploma certificate back to Kaplan, or put it at the bottom of the bird cage.
Education is invaluable and you will reap the benefits of that investment for the rest of your life
hey, Boo Hoo if you’re any good at your job $16k is a drop in the ocean. be happy that you learnt a lot doing the Kaplan EDUCATION course. so get out there and give your clients the benefit of your knowledge and that goes for all you other peanuts that are complaining about something that does not even effect you.
What a joke. We will never become a professionally recognised group. I’ve been in the industry for 23 years finished my studies last year while running my business. People are just dam lazy to get the studies done.
It’s not about a piece of paper. It’s about Ethics. There is a large group of ethical and advanced advisers – just because you had to complete a piece of paper and spend thousands doesn’t mean they are all fraudulent or you are better than them. When you understand that. You may learn.
Or too busy running their business. I’m glad I held out and didn’t waste the time and money getting an unneeded piece of paper.
And to think, Product Providers are now likely to offer your clients Financial Advice for free.
If you have been in the industry 23 years, and consider yourself a professional, why did you wait so long to become professionally educated?
No problem, PJ. Soon enough, your clients will be able to see the wheat from the cowboys. I’ll make sure my Masters is front and centre and justify my fee-for-service.
Dam lazy or smarter than you, for waiting. It’s subjective really.