Under FASEA’s proposed guidance, advisers will be required to have an AQF7 qualification (equivalent to a three-year full-time university degree) or an AQF8 qualification (equivalent to a postgraduate certificate) to continue practising after 1 January 2024.
Ms O’Dwyer said the new guidance offers clarity to existing advisers regarding the course of action they will need to take.
“This announcement will provide early certainty around what will be required for financial advisers to meet the new requirements,” Ms O’Dwyer said.
Ms O’Dwyer said under the previous regime it was possible to become a qualified adviser “after only four days’ training”, and both the Financial System Inquiry and the parliamentary joint committee on corporations and financial services had “understandably” found this to be insufficient.
“This announcement by FASEA continues the implementation of the government’s reforms that will build trust and confidence in the financial advice industry and ensure that consumers have access to professional advisers who will put their interests first,” Ms O’Dwyer said.
FPA chief executive Dante de Gori has also backed the guidance, saying in a statement that it will “help alleviate some of the anxiety” financial advisers are feeling regarding the future of their careers.
“We are supportive of FASEA’s framework and welcome the clarity provided by today’s proposed guidance on qualifications and pathways for existing planners,” he said.
To view the full announcement from FASEA, visit https://www.ifa.com.au/images/Existing-Adviser-Qualifications.pdf.
The problem is we have no united voice and are an easy target. The FPA and AFA have let all of us down in a very big way.
It’s as clear as mud to me. So if you have a DFP (Mentor pre 2014) and ADFP (Mentor post 2014) does this mean that a Graduate Diploma (8 subjects, but 2 waived) will meet AQF8 which is what I have been told a few times but who knows?
What is clear is there will only be a fraction of advisers left post 2024
Pathway 1 – Undergrad in FP
Pathway 2 – DFP, ADFP, Grad Dip (based on already doing the first two, you’d need to complete the 8 subjects of the Grad Dip)
Pathway 3 – Chartered Fellowship or CFP (the one you actually worked for) with bridging course to meet the additonal 4 subjects at AQF8 (These courses arent to be released until 2019)
The only certainty its providing is for the FSC to get rid of advisers and sell more direct junk, bigger profits, less claims paid. O’Dwyer will no doubt have been promised a job with one of them in the future.
Killian nice article but you said “an AQF8 qualification (equivalent to a postgraduate certificate) ” I believe that’s incorrect. A Graduate Certificate is only 4 subjects and will not meet Degree equivalence status & there are no Grad Cert’s listed on the FAESA A list… whilst a Graduate Diploma is 8 subjects. At between $2,200 to $3,700 a subject it’s only a $15,000 error.
Well the more surprising thing is depending on who you do it through, a graduate diploma isn’t sufficient either. The current Kaplan grad diploma wouldn’t be enough from what I can see, you need to do the Masters with two particular electives. I was a huge advocate of the bar being raised but this is crazy. I meet the standards but feel for those who have just finished the masters and haven’t done the right electives, what a crock!
For Kaplan, The FASEA list of approved courses says “Grad Dip of Fin Plan (with a Bachelor of Masters Degree) when including the following units:” and then it lists them. That implies you have to do the Masters Degree with specific courses to get your Grad Dip recognised. Is that how you see it Reality ?? If so that it extremely messy and means a lot of extra study for people looking at Bridging courses. I have a degree in Finance and additional finance related study but it is too old. It’s looking like you have to do a Masters almost for existing planners.
No, the 2024 standard is just the 8 subjects in the Grad Dip of FP. We are yet to hear anything on RPL yet and that may reduce the burden.
How is this providing certainty? I’m even more confused now than I was before!
It is providing O’Dwyer and her FSC cronies with certainty that they can sell more junk insurance in the future, as there will be fewer advisers left to warn consumers of the dangers.
What utter bull-dust. FASEA’s announcement has thrown our profession into chaos. Those of us with degrees (even Masters Degrees in Financial Planning) are going to be forced back to school. This IS NOT what the government told us. This was supposed to bring all advisers up to a degree or equivalent standard. It is a complete debacle and Kelly O’Dwyer needs to be accountable for this mess. If this mob is going to preside over CPD, the exam and a new code of conduct, we are all stuffed!
Where on earth are you getting that if you have a Masters of Financial Planning that you are going to go back to school. That is just false.
The point Ben is probably making is that the institution that awarded him his Masters is NOT on the FPEC list of approved courses at this stage and so that qualification does not count. Only the FPEC courses are approved. There will be a few Advisers in this unfortunate position. I really hope the FPEC list is make broader to accommodate.
Well said Ben. These are the very same people that expect a 19 year old school leaver to know what they want to specalise in 3 years down the road and will want to study a Bachelor of Financial Planning. The talent pool of people who are going to buy our businesses, who we will employ to replace us is getting smaller and smaller. I’m 100% behind lifting education standards but it’s a mess.
So why not just weed out those that have only qualified in four days previously? Surely those advisers that have made an effort (and done the time) to get a financial planning qualification through extended study shouldn’t be tarred with the same brush. As usual, those in a minority spoil it for everyone.
Over Complicated O’Dwyer strikes again.
I demand that all politicians have to get qualified to AQF7 or AQF8 before being able to continue to stuff up this entire country, as they attempt to run it.
I demand that all pollies past education and or law degrees that are more than 7 years old are completely worthless and you go back and redo all education again.
I demand all pollies complete Ethics education as clearly most of them have no ethics.
And I demand all pollies do a degree in Common Sense as that seems to be the biggest thing lacking in our country leaders.
Yep, I like that and it sounds fair to set standards for all MPs owing to the failings and indiscretions of some. Except that those requirements would probably leave us with no Politicians at all.
YES! I agree. The politicians who are demanding we get ridiculously high qualifications far above what we need (i.e. Risk Advisers) are the same politicians that have little if any qualifications to be an effective politician to RUN THE COUNTRY! I’d love to see each minister’s personal qualifications for their portfolio – AQF8 all?! I demand they all get qualified by 2024 or GET OUT! Maybe Kelly O’Dwyer can back me up on THAT one?! What are HER qualifications by the way? We should all be demanding this from the rooftops.