Late last night the lower house voted in favour of the Corporations Amendment (Simple Corporate Bonds and Other Measures) Bill 2013: Amendments, acting on the recommendation of the parliamentary joint committee on corporations and financial services that the piece of legislation be passed.
In a statement, financial services and superannuation minister Bill Shorten said the financial planning-relevant sections of the Bill would further the government’s Future of Financial Advice agenda.
“The amendments enshrining the terms ‘financial adviser’ and ‘financial planner’ and similar terms will enhance consumer protections by making it easier for Australian consumers to identify genuine providers of financial product advice,” he said.
“The amendments will make it an offence for a person to hold themselves out to be an authorised financial adviser or financial planner when they are not, or to use terms of similar importance, thereby helping to protect consumers against property spruikers and other unlicensed operators.
“The financial advice industry has welcomed these amendments as a historic reform that will benefit both consumers and industry, and will strengthen the benefits of the Government’s Future of Financial Advice (FOFA) reform package.”
The move follows a period of intense lobbying from financial advice industry stakeholders and a thorough PJC investigation.
I’m really glad that the FPA has spent so much time and effort (and member fees) on something that their members didn’t ask for or really value. Maybe if they focused on representing their members views better on other more important pieces of legislation we won’t have the FOFA mess we now have on our hands. It’s funny when as planners we are being told by the FPA that we need to demonstrate our value to our clients. Maybe the FPA should listen to their own advice.
Hey Johno, agreed… I have been a member of the FPA for near on 20 years – most for the same reasons that you sighted. I work for a large corporate licensee who have recently stated that this year will be last year FPA fees will be paid for and on behalf of their advisers. They have also stated that membership of the FPA and/or the designation is no longer a pre-requisite to obtaining employment with them. Is this a sign of things to come…? I really do not think that Fred and Mary Nurk give two hoots as to whether I am a CFP. And I have never been asked. Fred and Mary can now take comfort in the fact that I am a Financial Planner (strategist) because I am eligible to do so. Is that now qualification enough?
Can we raise our fees now? I’m a recognized professional. If you can crack that code below before commenting I reckon you’re already pretty clever……
This is a fantastic step forward for the creation of the profession of financial planning and it has only happened because of the vision and persistence of the FPA. They pushed this in response to member’s demands. It is not the silver bullet and there is still much to do. Congratulations to both sides of parliament for seeing the value in this move.
AGreed, I have been a member of FPA for well over 10 years and dont think I’ve received any value. I only NEED to continue my membership due to my CFP status. Maybe a more worthwhile pursuit would be the ability to retain CFP via ongoing education not reliant on being a member who pays $1100 p.a. membership fees for nothing other than to retain this title I earned many years ago…
How does this improve clients’ services? We should expect our parliament to devote their time to somethings more significant! Perhaps we will be forced to put a designation on our business stationary. Do we have to apply to use the term? Can we advise without reference to FPl or FAdv?
Awesome, now if we could just rid this industry of companies who flog useless, pointless products & memberships through fear tactics similar to revenue raising from speed cameras. Oh….hang on that IS the FPA.
I can feel another education standard brewing!
Now I assume journalists and ASIC and others will be a bit more careful when saying a “financial adviser” has stolen money and being punished, when in fact they weren’t licensed financial advisers at all.