The government’s proposed new professional standards for advisers are expected to be enforced by 1 July 2016, with transitional arrangements for existing advisers to begin in 2017.
Speaking to advisers at the FPA Professionals Congress last week, Mr De Gori said while those details are yet to be worked out, it is not likely that all advisers will need to satisfy the recommended degree requirement.
“I can assure you that from the FPA’s perspective, we’re not advocating that all of you go and do undergraduate degrees. No one is asking you to have to go back and do an undergraduate degree,” he said.
“But the reality is, for some of you, some additional study may be required.”
Mr De Gori does expect all advisers to pass a single exam, however, despite their educational achievements or number of years in the industry.
“It doesn’t matter what training or qualifications you have, everyone needs to pass a one-off exam as the transitional benchmark and you all need to subscribe to a code of ethics,” he said.
“Effectively, according to the [proposed] timelines, if you haven’t passed the exam by July 2019, you will no longer be able to be on the register.”
The transitional arrangements will be determined by an independent body, which is set to be established by July 2016. The group will also have 12 months to develop the curriculum, the exam and the minimum CPD standards, Mr De Gori said.
After that, advisers will have two years to complete any further study, pass the one-off exam and subscribe to a code of ethics.
“That’s the timeline that’s being proposed – it’s very short,” Mr De Gori said.
“In terms of getting there, we are likely to have some draft legislation by the end of the year.”
FFS,
I can solve all of this infighting bulls…. in 5 minutes.
Get the regulator to talk to an actual adviser instead of product manufacturers (Like the banks) self interest groups and politicians who are all there trying to protect an interest other then the clients.
99.99% of advisers aren’t here to rip anyone off we will leave that to the vertically integrated trough feeding instos.
So why is the industry so far removed from a professional providing advice to an individual. That is all an advisers job is. all the other rubbish is just that rubbish.
Financial Advisers should be Degree qualified and should have been many years ago.
I remember advisers whinging like the world had ended when in 1998 they made it compulsory to do DFP1. What a joke!
And it is still a bloody joke that you only have to do DFP 1 to 4, that is the equivalent of half a year of the first year of a degree. i.e. 1/6th of a degree.
Thankfully our industry will become more professional when degrees are required.
However, some realistic grandfathering and bridging past education needs to be included for well experienced advisers.
And if I already have a Bachelor of Economics and Business Law, Full DFP 1 -8, SMSF Specialist Adviser, Estate Planning Specialist Adviser, why am I going to be forced to pay for some other rubbish exam ??
It’s the right path to professionalism but the process needs serious thought to make it fair and effective.
Good comment Steve Legg.
I hope and pray this ridiculous FOA course flogging regime will cease one day and they remember who they should support.
What number of courses and degrees do FPA staff have?
To be honest, most if not all other professions do require a degree, so the requirement to pass an exam, in comparison is really not that onerous. I think the FPA has done a great job ensuring that the exam, which is a ‘one-off’, is all we have to do.
Unfortunately, many of the claims where clients have been compensated have been as a result of inappropriate advice from ‘experienced’ advisers, so there was little chance the requirement to test all advisers was going to be avoided. Who knows what the exam will look like but I expect most competent advisers should have no issue with passing and those that have a problem with it will be removed from the profession which is a good thing, right?
What other professions have to ever do this simply to prove they should remain in business??
How about the greatest threat to Australian’s future financial prosperity – the Politicians – undergo tests and exams to prove they should be there.
Firetrucking insane, and the great & wise FPA is condoning it as a good thing rather than listening to its members – once again.
Hi Steve Legg – the compensation issue is not that clear cut. If Government Legislation results in compensation arrangements as a result of losses likely to be incurred to businesses for the likes of Commercial Fishermen and Taxi owners (as a result of the Government legalising Uber), what’s the reason we are not entitled to compensation? Decisions have been made and are to be legislated “which impact on our livelihood through no fault of our own”. The issue is WHO PAYS THE COMPENSATION? Is it the Life Offices or the Government? Perhaps the solution (as has been suggested by others) is to increase existing renewal commissions streams.If the Life Offices hope to mend the relationship with IFA’s they need to act in a manner other than just using “platitudes”.
So… It has really become “us & them”?
Love the tone of the message & the combative language used.
I have yet another reason to be pleased I handed in my FPA/CFP membership last year. Still being lead by muppets with no real care about the actual adviser and the effect on their business. Roger Smith – nice thought but you know the reality…we are being hung out to dry. I am just not sure how to play their game and get at least some positive outcome. And Gerry, the exam willbe a tool to weed out the lazy adviser or else it will be of such a low standard that it is merely ticking a box to appease the regulator. Too much box ticking around nowadays and not enough substance.
More red tape and further unnecessary complexity to our once very simple industry. Stop destroying this industry with red tape and a huge compliance regime.
Wonderful, assume FPA will be providing the simple one off exam free of charge as part of it’s commitment to the industry and it’s already paying members ? That would appear to be in the members best interests perhaps ?
“pass a simple exam” – but why? What’s the purpose…a form of extra punishment just for being an adviser? Fair enough if you’re a new entrant or didn’t get enough CPD points. Just another stupid unproductive measure in my opinion. Would love to see how they’re going to administer this exam when advisers specialize or are authorized in different areas of advice. Or is it just going to be compliance questions?
COMPENSATION PACKAGES FOR RISK ADVISERS.
Like most Professions / Industries where decisions are made and legislated “which impact on the livelihood of others through no fault of their own”, it is customary for COMPENSATION PACKAGES to be put in place to compensate for the loss of value to that business. The LIF will result in such losses. What is the FPA, AFA and Government doing to implement such a compensation scheme for Risk Advisers?
Hilarious – now why did I think he was going to say that ?