In this morning’s Senate session, Mr Patrick said he was withdrawing the amendment – which related to grandfathered large proprietary companies – because there was “urgent need for financial advisers to be relieved in terms of their requirements for professional qualifications”.
“I will indicate to the chamber however that the cross-bench, Greens and Labor are quite determined to deal with this issue,” Mr Patrick said.
“We cannot have a privileged class of companies where there is one rule for certain companies and another for all others.”
In an email to AIOFP executive chairman Peter Johnston, Mr Patrick apologised for the “angst” the last minute amendment had caused.
“I appreciate this politicking has caused some angst within your industry and I apologise for that angst,” Mr Patrick said.
“Everyone that contacted my office were supportive of what we were doing, just not the way we were doing it.”
Mr Patrick said the grandfathering amendment had now been attached to a separate Treasury omnibus bill so it did not delay the FASEA extension further.
In the Senate, One Nation’s Malcolm Roberts echoed Mr Patrick’s comments that the party would support the amendment in the subsequent bill.
“One Nation will be supporting what Senator Patrick said in the future – we see this amendment as very important for the country,” Mr Roberts said.
The government’s motion that the Senate not insist on the amendment was supported by a majority of the upper house. Shortly after, the bill returned to the House of Representatives where it was passed by a majority of MPs.
ifa understands the adviser associations had been lobbying Mr Roberts overnight to support the removal of the amendment.
Stockbrokers and Financial Advisers Association chief executive Judith Fox welcomed the passage of the bill, while pointing out that its rough transition through Parliament had been extremely stressful for advisers.
“At a time when investment advisers were experiencing a huge increase in workload dealing with client enquiries during the current market turmoil, which made study and exam sitting particularly difficult, the constant threats to the extension being achieved this year added significant pressure,” Ms Fox said.
FPA chief executive Dante De Gori said the passage of the bill was “a victory for members”.
“This bill is a lifeline for financial planners across Australia and will grant them the necessary extension to complete new education requirements at a time when they are out in our communities providing advice to Australians during COVID-19,” Mr De Gori said.
“Today’s announcement will provide some relief to planners who are struggling to support not only existing clients but also providing the broader community with advice as many Australians find themselves in a financial situation they have never experienced before.”
FSC chief executive Sally Loane also welcomed the extension, saying it gave advisers the necessary time to meet the standards.
“Allowing advisers the time to sit the exam and meet the strengthened requirements will continue to build trust in financial services as it contributes to our economic recovery, while encouraging future generations to join the profession,” Ms Loane said.
All I can say is Opt in, FASEA, Royal Commission, FDS, ASIC Levy, TPB Levy, PI Premiums up, Business valuations down, new student enrollments down. If we get rid of advisers (in any way possible) that contributed to this mess… it must be surely be a good thing? Very odd that all the advisers I talk to say how much they care for there clients and yet you’ve had so much Government Intervention.That dosen’t add up. Me No understand. Please explain? How can that be. If you did care for your clients we would not be here. You would have done everything in your power to create a Profession and prevent this over regulation. So here we are. Over regulated. Doing exams.
I actually fail to see what point you are trying to make. So all advisers you talk to care for their clients, so because ones that you don’t know or the Big 4/5/6 did wrong by their clients the ones that you know couldn’t possibly really care for their clients???
If you have the answer to how control every adviser and licensee i think a few bodies would love to hear from you. Thats like saying all doctors are bad at their jobs because some doctors just churn and burn 15 minute appointments to load up their medicare reimbursements.
Or blanketing all police officers evil and corrupt because you have some up on chargers for crimes.
For those saying that FASEA will get rid of unethical advisers, just a friendly reminder that CFP 1 is solely devoted to ethics and I know a few of those advisers who have been kicked out for unethical advice.
I just came for the comments
Well done, FPA and AFA.
Get real buddy. The SMSF Association, The Stockbrokers and Financial Advisers Association, AIOFP and UFP presented a united front to the Minister etc etc and the FPA didn’t want to be involved. The FPA represents institutions that got us into this mess in the place. Check your facts.
Good on advisers saying NO extension. Dragging this on till 2022 what a joke. 6-12 months yes. Why get upset at these individuals that have passed already and made many sacrifices to operate above the law. This exam is not rocket science scumbags. Perhaps after being in the industry for 20 years myself and being at a position where we have to do an exam makes me bloody pissed and I now blame my peers for this over regulation. Seeing so many advisers that put themselves first as opposed to their clients. Run away back to your BOLR. Run back to your product owned licensee and subsidized dealer group fees. Run back to your 4000 clients that you can’t service on a normal day your FUM and blame your workload. Run away to your discounted FPA fees. Keep complaining about FASEA Standards around conflicts of interest too.
Mate, a bit of self reflection re the tone of your comment would be helpful to you as i feel embarrassed for you. I went early, did the exam, bridging course etc and have been an adviser since 1998, but i am not naive enough to think that all of the advisers that went early are of higher caliber and not insensitive enough to realise that people often have valid reasons other than being “scumbags” not to sit exam. Go and have a Snickers, because the joke is on you with the tone of your comment!
Ben L. . Please reflect why you’re in this mess. Most likely you’re like most advisers. You don’t even care that Advisers have been placed in this mess in the first place.
Delightful language Tom – no surname volunteered…probably to protect ID by your clients so they are not aware of your attitudinal issues.
Just do the exam – it is not that hard and you do not have to spend days studying. More time is spent on compliance each day.
[quote=Tom]Get real. You had two years for F sake. It ain’t that hard. [/quote][quote=Tom]Get real. You had two years for F sake. It ain’t that hard. [/quote]
My, my… aren’t your clients lucky to have a piece of work like you advising them. Your lack of empathy and compassion must make you a real winner in life… In fact, you are an example of exactly what is wrong in this world. Your inability to put yourself in another’s shoes and callous disregard of another person’s suffering is astounding.
As the OP said, you don’t know a thing about what they are facing in their life – therefore you can’t judge the reasons why they may not have sat the exam yet. And for all you know, they’re registered to sit the next session before the old deadlne anyway.
Why don’t you put yourself in the shoes of Australians who can no longer afford advice and have a good hard look at why you have to do an exam in the first place. Maybe you should have a think why you need to do additional study.
Why don’t you ask the commentator XX why none of his/her students want to put their hands up to become Financial Planners. Perhaps I care too much. Perhaps you’re lack of caring for wider Australians is why your so over regulated.
Ha ha ha, pretty rich isn’t it. A politician saying “We cannot have a privileged class of companies where there is one rule for certain companies and another for all others.”, when there are absolutely different rules for pollies versus the general public..!!!!! This argument doesn’t carry any weight coming out of a pollies mouth, unless they can show this across the board. Stop preaching one thing and doing another… I left financial services early this year after 12 yrs, it’s getting totally screwed over….
I bet all those clowns wanting to wipe out half the Adviser population are going to love the doubling of ASIC’s Adviser cost recovery fees. Up 70% in 2 years and double that with halving the advisers.
What a joy are our over zealous ASIC buffoons are and their FARSEA buddies.
Pretty confident what side of the fence you sit on in regards to this exam, we’re all living on borrowed time until Labor Wins parliament and stacks the FASEA oversight board with Fat Union reps, Choice Officials and Hesta reps. if you can’t recgonise that, and make some changes as an collective industry and find half a day to an entire weekend to study for a fairly simple exam than you may as well leave now. 2 more years to drag this out. wtf. 6-12 months yes. Go back to your 4000 clients and just tell em you’re retiring.
I lecture financial planning at Uni. Over the last two years I have only had 1 student put their hand up with certainty that they wish to work in FP. Only 1 and these are students studying a degree in FP. I can’t blame them, I am looking to get out myself, ASAP.
[quote=Sit the Exam already]I am still hoping the extension will not pass. This industry needs a culling. So many dodgy advisers out there. So much so that you can rely on at least 1 person or licensee getting banned per month.[/quote][quote=Sit the Exam already]I am still hoping the extension will not pass. This industry needs a culling. So many dodgy advisers out there. So much so that you can rely on at least 1 person or licensee getting banned per month.[/quote]
And you’d know exactly what about me and my reasons for not having say the exam yet??? Do you know about the parents who have health issues? The house extensively damaged in a natural disaster and under an insurance claim? The clients who need my attention focused on them because of this pandemic?
Grow up! We don’t all live in your perfect world. Some of us are dealing with real issues out here and need some extra time.
Get real. You had two years for F sake. It ain’t that hard.
Tom & Sit the Exam already. You are both tools. I feel sorry for anyone unlucky enough to be one of your clients.
Quite the contrary Ex FPA member. These guys have been independently tested to verify that they know their stuff regarding the law, compliance and ethics.I too have sat and passed the exam. If you operate and behave in the “spirit” of FASEA, you’ll have no problem. – That’s putting your clients interests ahead of your old, outdated business model. If you don’t “get it”, you should be out of the industry.
So not one person has passed the exam who is dodgy or unethical then. It cracks me up how you guys keep playing that tune
When the August (Sitting 7) results are released more than half on the FAR will have sat and passed. So that moment is coming.
I am glad this extension helps any Adviser in hardship, but the people this extension really helps are those who are leaving anyway and not ever going to sit. They get another year in the Industry.
Exactly. I know some people who are exactly in that position. They don’t plan on sitting the exam but are happy to operate until they can’t. There will also be another group who will pass the exam but have no intention to do the educational requirements. That means that someone who has done one of those 4 week instant financial advice courses will be able to keep operating until 2026 as long as they passed one exam.
[quote=Sit the Exam already]I am still hoping the extension will not pass. This industry needs a culling. So many dodgy advisers out there. So much so that you can rely on at least 1 person or licensee getting banned per month.[/quote][quote=Sit the Exam already]I am still hoping the extension will not pass. This industry needs a culling. So many dodgy advisers out there. So much so that you can rely on at least 1 person or licensee getting banned per month.[/quote]
Agreed. There’s no excuse not to have passed it already. Better to get these lazy advisers out.
Yeah,bloody lazy advisers who have young families and crazy busy practices. How dare they not have taken time away from their families or businesses to do this exam like we have! No wait…sorry fellas…i haven’t done the exam yet for that reason. Can i change my complaint to getting rid of advisers who live in a bubble?
Agreed, Absolute rubbish for the person who has written this… people actually have decent businesses to focus on.. seems like the hero above has so much time on his hands because he most probably has no clients!!
So the advisers who have passed already don’t have lives, young kids or running successful FP practices? We have made sacrifices in order to pass this exam based on the previously quoted deadline, this extension is a kick in the face for those that have done the right thing. You had 2 years to pass, why do you need another 2 years?
So judgemental.
When certain Parliamentarians think they can treat advisers & their businesses like play things like this, we have a major issue in this nation. This is disrespect on steroids. But in reality, we are still back with the original time frame foisted on us.
And the so called associations that are meant to represent and the advisers allowed the Parliamentarians to do this.
Good ol ‘sit-the-exam-already.’ Easy to hide your face behind that slogan. Another of those trolls that use the internet to stir, grandstand and swipe.
I would have thought that Rex would have been across such issues before he voted. Doesn’t he have some form of obligation to vote in the best interests of the Australian people.
Best interests obligations apply to the advice profession only – Not to politicians. Their obligation is to the Party first. Do and say whatever is necessary to attain power and maintain it.
I’m sure there will be a small number of advisers with genuine issues who deserve this reprieve. But I can’t help but think this is just the Government kicking the can down the road. Advisers are leaving in droves and it has nothing to do with the exam. Excessive red-tape and uncertainty from ASIC over-regulation and the unworkable FASEA Code of Ethics are the issues driving advisers out of the profession. Even some who have passed the exam and have FASEA approve quals are heading for the exits. It is time for the FPA to use this little bit of momentum and apparent empathy from parliamentarians to push for real change otherwise the adviser exodus will continue, albeit it delayed 12 months.
Well said
I am still hoping the extension will not pass. This industry needs a culling. So many dodgy advisers out there. So much so that you can rely on at least 1 person or licensee getting banned per month.
I would love to go through your files… Can almost guarantee with that attitude you’re doing the wrong thing.
my guess is a fresh graduate that has next zero real world experience and not only thinks thinks they are smarter than the majority of experienced planners but also the market.
If I was a “fresh” graduate as you say. I would need to do a professional year under an adviser (who has passed the exam and) who has 2 years of experience already; at by which at the by the end of quarter 3 I would be required to sit the exam as well. Your comment makes no sense.
Talk about not making any sense…..have you read your reply…lol!
I’m sure it didn’t make any sense to you since you clearly don’t know about the 2017 amendments to the corporations act. Good luck on the exam Champ! lol
I’ve passed as well and agree – a lot need to go.
Many will never pass the exam whether the date was extended or not.
Don’t worry about Fred.
Fred is angry and needs to vent when you gave a reasonable opinion on the subject.
It wont matter if he/she is with one of the big licensees. ASIC only seem to be interested in small fish these days
Even with the best attitude in the world, and having passed every exam thrown at us, I have no doubt that ASIC and or a good lawyer could drive a bus through any of our files. Multiple regulations ans requirements and a Code of Ethics so all encompassing its almost impossible to comply with its written word.
How do you gauge that I am doing the wrong thing for wanting to get rid of ineffective advisers (read salesman) from our industry?
I agree. The industry needs a cleanout. Advisers at the big banks and AMP seem to be the main players with fewest FASEA exams completed
Professional Standard 12 FASEA CoE.
You may have forgotten it. Get a grip champ and a reality check – one exam won’t stop the bad apples.
Seriously?! Do you really think the “dodgy advisers” are not smart enough to pass the exam or meet the relevant education standards?!
Passing an ethics exam will not magically make someone more ethical….
Have you even taken the exam? It’s not [b]solely [/b][b][/b]on ethics. It also encapsulates the ability to [u]construct financial advice[/u][u][/u] for different clients; how the law affects what disclosure documentation must be given and to whom and at what time for example. It is so much more than JUST an “[i]ethics exam[/i][i][/i].” It tests your technical competence using case scenario based questions. Any adviser who isn’t able to answer questions such as those on the exam [size=20px]SHOULD NOT BE ADVISIN[size=20px][/size]G CLIENTS[/size].
I agree that the exam due date should not be extended because people have had more than enough time to get off their bum and do it, if it was a high priority for them. I will however stop on you this statement because the exam had less to do with financial planning than the business studies exam I took in high school. It was written by someone who has never sat in front of a client and who had no idea about how financial planning works in the real world.
Yes, and its because of people like you that the Germans actually created a word….”schadenfreude”.
Many advisers are doing it tough and C-19 has only made it harder for them. So many of our colleagues are NOT coping and many have even taken their own lives.
A little bit of decency would probably make your own life that little more brighter.
The extension was absolutely the right thing to do….the inhumane thing to do.
Yes, it’s “inhumane” indeed as you say.
Aside from a very few deserving souls, another year keeping some really bad people in a job they are terrible at to the detriment of the public.
I hope you have the same empathy for your clients.
If arrogance and ignorance were required qualifications
, you’d never have to sit another exam!
Anonymous has failed to consider everyones personal situation and needs
I love how you continue to think that only ethical and never put a foot wrong advisers will be the ones that have passed or will pass