Speaking on a panel at the FSC Summit 2018, Dr Sanders – who was appointed as FASEA’s inaugural CEO before leaving to join Deloitte – said the biggest challenge facing the industry is not the new standards themselves, but the manner in which those standards are achieved.
“This is all happening at once, that’s the real issue,” he said.
“There’s exam preparation requirements from next year, there’s CPD requirements from next year, there’s degree qualification requirements from next year, and there’s a narrow window within which to deal that, so I do think that the ‘how’ needs to be given more time to develop and breathe.”
Mr Sanders said his “one suggestion” to advisers would be to speak to government about the timing of the new standards’ implementation.
“FASEA’s mandate is clear and I’m not here to in any way, shape or form criticise that and their deadlines are tight and they’re doing a very tough job, but in the face of that, my years and years of experience means we’d take it to government,” he said.
“Take that perspective to government and argue well, why don’t we change the dates, why don’t we give consideration to how long this takes to get the right outcome instead of a rushed outcome.
“It’s a consideration about giving options about when do these things get done and how do these things get done in a more constructive and appropriate way, because there’s a real sense of trying to get things done very quickly because the deadlines are very tight, and I think the danger in that is that we won’t get the outcome we’re looking for.”
Mr Sanders added that tight deadlines could prompt some advisers to make a reactionary decision to leave the industry, rather than “engaging and choosing what options are available to them”.
“That would be deeply saddening, and not the intent of the regime,” he said.
Oh the outrage…A masters in FP at one of the smaller unis is a bit of a joke e.g easy as for someone in the industry. People just need to man up and realise getting a formal education might actually be good for you. Maybe your kids will be proud of you..
So Government (and Corporates) closed down defined benefit schemes some time ago because they were no longer affordable.
Then the Government also keeps fiddling with the Age Pension to make it harder to qualify (tighter assets test rules, extending qualifying age). Among other things.
And super and SG was introduced as a half-way solution – i.e. workers to pay for themselves.
That is why people seek financial advice. With less and less guarantees in place, and more personal responsibility, they need help making decisions about their future. But now Government is mishandling this as well, so people will struggle to do that too.
Take away the ship, and leave them with a lifeboat. Now take that away as well.
[b]Man up pollies. Go on, since you don’t need financial advisers, explain to the Australian people how they will plan and pay for their future. Can’t wait to see the response. [/b]
A lot of understandably emotional responses here but I think what Deen says is very sensible.
There is nothing wrong with the time-frame or the legislation. The problem has been caused by FASEA alone. They were given some very simple mandates, but have deliberately chosen to go way further than ever intended by the Government. Now they are wrapped in a quagmire of their own making. I don’t want to hear excuses from this former CEO, who bailed after only a few months. I want answers. What the hell is going on at FASEA? Advisers have had a gut-full of their nonsense.
[quote=B]We’ve had a very good idea of requirements for some time; an adviser that has reasonable ‘planning’ skills (pun intended), could have started studying one to two years ago to the point of needing little to no preparation for the coming exam; I’ve personally coached advisers through this tertiary accreditation acquisition and pathway process and began it myself slightly earlier.
I’m sorry, but have I missed something here? Unless you are a person of relevance and have direct involvement with FASEA, I call you out on this as someone trying to simply push your own academic agenda probably sent to financially benefit.
Seems reasonable to me.
This will sound terrible, but I truly believe the ‘Powers that be’ really do want to have a drastically reduced amount of Financial Advisers/Planners to deal with over the next few years. Common sense and actual facts didnt work for LIF, and I expect the same for FASEA…as that wont force a cull. For those of us that manage to get through all this crap over the next few years, the rewards will be there. Because unfortunately, there will be alot less of us around. But don’t let that be you! Stick it up em and hopefully see you all at the exam rooms next year! And then on to the bloody degree in 2020!
Unfortunately two main issues underpin the joke that FASEA has become. 1.) We have a Minister that has been convinced by her advisors and other lobby groups that the issues with the advice sector are that if a financial adviser does not hold the highest tertiary qualifications then they do not act or advise professionally, nor are actually capable of providing good advice, regardless of the fact that the large majority of “qualified” vs ‘non qualified’ do. 2.) If you are a political party dealing with an issue that has drawn the attention of voters (rightly or wrongly) then to look like you are taking action and resolving the issue you focus on the easiest target and manipulate matters to looking like they were the issue. Sadly, it is financial planners and relevant qualifications they have chosen. Experience gets ignored as that has the potential to discredit the argument the government are trying to build. Even an academic will concur that a tertiary qualification only provides a low base of knowledge, experience underpins are actions on a daily basis. Couple this with an agenda by the Government and Kelly O’Dwyer to have FASEA put all of this into play before the next Federal Election and you have the rushed and ill-considered proposals by FASEA we are seeing. History and the recent Royal Commission have confirmed that advisor qualifications and technical ability are not behind many poor advice outcomes or the issues with the wealth management sector. I have a good knowledge of the workings in Canberra and I can say with certainty that outside of public perception and political point scoring that Kelly O’Dwyer has no interest in actually fixing the issues. Given minister’s workloads they have no time to read and understand issues properly and she would have also based her legislation including FASEA on a final briefing by her advisors who may have drawn conclusions based upon very limited information of their own and weighed up with what they feel the public want to see and hear, whether right or wrong. What has been proposed is to simply look like action is being taken by her in the voter’s eyes. Sadly, the consequences of her own self-interest have the potential to ruin the livelihoods of many hard working advisers who have always provided prudent advice and compassionate service to their clients! Given MP’s are not accountable when unintended consequences happen, she would not be even giving a second thought to the ramifications and would have already moved on to thinking about other political matters. Outside of the public view, Labor and Liberal both have close working relationships with the banks as they understand their importance to the economy, GDP etc and whilst we all know that many of the issues with advice have resulted from the banks, the advice sector has been chosen as the sacrificial lamb to look like action is being taken to clean things up. The call to action has never been louder, no matter what side of the education standard you fit into.
Seems like you have drawn many conclusions yourself!
seems spot on to me.
O’Dwyer is an absolute wrecking ball to IFA’s and small business.
O’Dwyer needs to go.
Combine this with her absolutely butchering the complexity ofthe biggest super reforms in 10 years because she didn’t consult industry.
ODwyer is arrogance personified.
a rant with no answers…just shifted blame. I get the Execs at the banks would have failed ethics at best…but the money for jam industry is being wound up. Adapt, improve or leave..
Have a very technical response to his comments, being [b]No Sh!t Sherlock[/b]!! He really is a bugger for secrets…
There is a window here to at least extend the time lines. WE ALL need to visit or call local MPs and send a message. We as a group need to become a thorn for the government— minority groups get action, about time we made a noise where it can be heard and START today.
maybe if the Government and others involved actually took the time to speak to those at the coal face they could come up with a far more practical outcome, instead of a rushed one eyed view of what should be done. Interesting to not that nearly all of the perpetrators of the poor service and advice are now getting out of financial services ( the banks)
I reckon there will be a lot of planners making claims on their income protection through mental stress in the not to distant future…….
If the governemnt destroys your income via LIF and now FASEA.
Long term mental health claim on my agreed income wit increasing claims is a nice little pay back.
Here is where all those smarty advisers and accountants/risk advisers who convinced their clients and themselves that an INDEMNITY IP contract with a seductive 15% premium savings was a smart idea will now get their come-uppance. Many of you who do get to claim for the forecast mental health IP claim will be claiming on the period of earnings when ALL advisers will have experienced A MAJOR LOSS OF EARNINGS under FOFA,LIFAND FASEA GOOD LUCK
The problem has been the lack of actual consultation with working Financial Advisers. In short it has been non existent. Advisers themselves have been fooled by their associations and in typical fashion think some product provider or licensee will save the day. As an adviser and casual academic within insights into both worlds, the conflicts of interest has been incredible and draw dropping…we are an easy target. Private Sector education and Public sector education is like Industry Super funds and Retail funds. Each have their own barrow to push. The FPA clearly is perceived by FASEA to be representing the Banks and AMP. The FPA has been focused on pushing it’s own FPEC list at the expense of highly educated degre advisers who even did their CFP course. The only ones FASEA have listened to so far is CPA Australia.
Until FASEA is willing to talk to advisers we’re going to be victims of this legislation and fighting it every way. All advisers need to write to their local MP again and remind them that they voted for this legislation.
Well said Anne spot on 🙂
Unfortunately FASEA will end the careers of thousands of advisers, depriving them of their ability to earn a living in their chosen profession. The Government have behaved unethically in pushing through these completely unnecessary and retrospective education standards and ruining peoples’ livelihoods. A disgrace.
Education standards are needed, however I agree the process has been poor from FASEA
too late.. between RC, ASIC, Govt and FAESA they have done their best to destroy and undermine this industry at every point. They have achieved nothing other than red tape, labeling all planners as dodgy as well as stressing most financial planners with their useless education standards (and passing a 4 hour exam where your livelihood depends on passing!) – I hope that they are proud of themselves – just pathetic.
The industry is stuffed when the people running the show do not understand what we actually do!
Seriously?? Had his time in the gig and it didn’t work out and now wants to complain it should have been done differently. Lack of self awareness???
We’ve had a very good idea of requirements for some time; an adviser that has reasonable ‘planning’ skills (pun intended), could have started studying one to two years ago to the point of needing little to no preparation for the coming exam; I’ve personally coached advisers through this tertiary accreditation acquisition and pathway process and began it myself slightly earlier.
Forgive me for being suspect Dr Sanders has either (a) been influenced/coerced through some means to proffer such a view (b) has some form of unusual compassion for advisers that aren’t astute enough to make the cut
sorry but i find this one hard to believe
Are you one of those business “coaches” who knows everything? I can hardly see you up there on that high horse.
[i]”We’ve had a very good idea of requirements for some time; an adviser that has reasonable ‘planning’ skills (pun intended), could have started studying one to two years ago to the point of needing little to no preparation for the coming exam…”[/i]
Nope. You’re kidding your yourself.
How could you study for an exam when you didn’t know what it was on? There have been ideas tossed around for some about what it might cover but only in the last month have FASEA released more information on exactly what topics they are planning to test on.
So you have started to pay for uni courses & waste valuable time towards a yet to be defined education path or outcome. You are truly a know it all pompous turkey 😯
Umm, I did exactly that as recently as 2014. But it appears I currently don’t meet FASEA’s requirements.
Instead I get told to suck it up. According to FASEA’s own website, there are no approved Grad Dips as things stand.
F*** that. And B, you’re full of it as far as I’m concerned.
Yes, that note on the FASEA website RE Gradiate Diplomas is very confusing. However the FPEC list stands. If you have a qualification on that FPEC list (including the Grad Dip listed there) you are fine as these have been adopted by FASEA.
finally SOME common sense
Didnt think to speak up as the FASEA boss Dr Sanders?
totally agree .. working to this end within the FASEA camp would have been far more effective ….
I hear he did speak up but was a lone voice and did the respectful thing and resigned. The man has integrity.
That’s a bit rich coming from Mr Sanders. He just ‘did the job’. He could have taken it to Government himself when in control of FASEA and pleaded the same. Instead he started by rushing a policy out 2 weeks before Christmas and upset 12,000 people.
Taking it to govt is a board decision…oh but the boards conflicted…oops
The milk is spilt, you can mop it up now. Perhaps, when you were there?