Turnbull weighs in on ‘four day’ planners

The Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull has followed on from his Minister for Revenue and Financial Services, Kelly O'Dwyer in claiming financial planners exist with as little as four days of training.

Addressing the Financial Services Council (FSC) this week, Turnbull pointed to the Government's reform agenda in the area of financial advice and particularly its education and professional standards initiative.

"Just last month, the Minister for Revenue, Kelly O'Dwyer, introduced legislation into Parliament to mandate professional standards for financial advisers," he said.

Related News:

"These new requirements replace a system that has allowed some financial advisers—with only four days of training—to provide advice to retail consumers."

"It will mean much more stringent training and supervision, so that consumers can have confidence in the industry and confidence that the advisers they speak with are ethical and qualified and are putting their interests first," the Prime Minister said.

"The new standards will come into effect at the beginning of 2019, so all new advisers entering the industry from then will need a degree. Existing advisers will have until 2024 to complete the requirements," he said.

"We are also working to make sure remuneration structures don't adversely affect the quality of advice consumers receive."




Related Content

Arthur, not Martha and certainly not Arther

As an old hack, Outsider knows that people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones when it comes to getting names right.Due to Australia’s embrace ...more

Profit and loss in the move beyond LIF

The Australian life/risk sector is facing a fundamental reshaping as advisers move beyond the LIF and banks consider their return on investment, Mike ...more

GRC Solutions partners with Stockbrokers and Financial Advisers Association

Following Kelly O’Dwyer’s announcement for the overhaul of conduct standards and competency requirements for advisers effective January 2019, the ...more

Author

Comments

Comments

From memory you don't even need to do a 4 day course to ruin, I mean 'lead' the country as a politician. Which has more impact and damaging to Australian's wealth?

I can imagine the fsc heads nodding oh yes Malcolm they are all not to be trusted, we have been saying this for ages, when you know who the real crooks are? The profit hungry vertically integrated members of the FSC itself, they are the ones that have caused many of the ills in the industry by distributing products under the guise of advice, but no,they just sit down slap backs blame the 4 days planners and have a nice xmas. Thanks Zurich and Comminsure for the 5 to 7% increases in IP for the clients for xmas too, really appreciated ......you bunch of bloodsuckers.

Seriously, any practice worth a grain of salt would not let a 4 day wonder loose on clients. the question was not addressed--who or what entity allowed 4 day wonders to enter the arena. The system was working well with the """REAL """ diploma or advanced diploma and CFP etc. if you really look into the new requirements--are the new graduates going to be let loose immediately??? One year mentoring at least is required. And for the majority of planners who have full qualifications including degrees and masters etc plus onging CPD completed, this whole issue has been a real insult to say the least. 4 day wonders are still being produced-stop the providers or employers just refuse to let them in the door.

So the fact that 'tax agents' can undergo a weekend course and have the public perceive them as 'accountants' is okay in comparison, Malcolm? They don't have a role to fill I gather?

I am all for increasing educational requirements in our profession or industry, but going on the record like a bloated bleating sheep signifying nothing except to make himself heard is self promotion at the expense of our industry.

How about tackling the insidious ISA and their union cronies, and having a level playing field across all advice channels, or make a carve out and recognise that some groups are there to 'sell' product (just like the ISA) and have a different designation for them and a much more limited product/advice range?

And before the 'holier than thou purists' start replying here as if I have committed blasphemy, yes I am fully qualified with a degree and CFP, am an IFA and not tied to a vertically integrated institution - this is simply commercial realism, and in a democracy market forces dictate what succeeds and what is left by the wayside, not legislation.

No matter what the morons say, the GFC wasn't created or perpetuated by us, and we didn't create the products that failed, so these measures won't help. The supposed 'leader' of our country, PM no less, publicly going on record to the effect that previously we were all shonks but the new sheriff has cleaned up the town does no one in our industry any good.

Couldn't agree more with the PM, when I was studying my DFP. and ADFP. I was laughed at by some advisers because it took time out from generating revenue. Also chastised by my then Licensee. Now the lazy are scrambling to get educated, no sympathy at all.

Accountants need to be very careful too, I have already seen one accountant do a 4 day course and is holding himself out to be a "Fully Qualified" Financial adviser. An accounting degree may give you the edge on tax but that is 10% of it, just because you have an accounting degree does not mean you are superior or have a mortgage on knowledge. For a start try an ethics course.

Turnbull is desperate to distract from his own poor performance.
Kicking the financial planning industry and banks is good press.
Put his performance under the spot light - a disastrous election, impending credit down grade, massive cuts to pensioner entitlements etc.
He'll do anything to try and distract attention from the main game.
Time for his termination.

You go to a doctor, you expect a highly qualified individual, that took many years to get to that qualification. I have my financial planning diplomas, hanging on my wall. Took 8 years in total, of hard slog. Apart from that my main aim was to put myself into the clients shoes. What was best for the client. This came from all the training and coal face exposure, along with multiple seminars, and on going training on a regular basis. To do this in 4 days, is impossible, yet I personally know those that have done just that ( on paper) . David

I have been in this industry for 30 years and have never know anyone to become a FP in 4 days, its the same as doing a uni degree you do all the training and upskilling over a period of time before the exam of which you have to pass, and like any other occupation you are always supervised while you are learning the ropes, most of the advisers who were in my ranks did years of Risk advice and servicing before they ever gave investment advice. So the term 4 day FPs is a myth and Turnbill should gets his facts right before slandering us all while his mates at the banks are cleaning up in every direction, now that the LIF is been passed ? all the Banks will leave the FSC just like ANZ plus they all just achieved a 200% sale price on their risk businesses (NAB) because they only have to pay the advisers half as much, mark my words that the FSC was a Front for the Cartel of the Banks and we let it slip by the keeper with out a word,. why the ACCC didn't do anything is a joke and I will make sure certain senators will hear more on this.

Why would anyone take notice of a differing, incompetent, left leaning, backstabbing politician.
His ignorance of the financial planning education processes for 99.9% of those who work in the industry is on display by his ill-informed comments,...... and who's only claim to fame is that he's got a lot of money.
Malcolm, go join the Labour Party, all Australians would be far better off, if you did.

Its no myth. I understand your concept of examinations, but what I have seen are training organisations going from go to whoo, in four days, and you come out qualified. It can not possibly be done. I doubt you could complete one module in that time .David

Actually he was a major shareholder of centric wealth for a number of years, so I think he does know a thing or two about the industry, or at least not as little as you say

Oh 4 days is a bit extreme, at least one major financial planning player takes a full 12 months to train a butcher to become product seller, sorry sorry, adviser. That is of course after they have been encouraged to pay 4x revenue to purchase their very own business, funding the retirement of the last generation of product sellers, sorry advisers.

Get real guys, If you are a genuine adviser you should have no problem with all the attention heaped on entry and education standards, yes real estate agents and tax agents don't have them..... but since when is that you benchmark?? The ends justify the means, for god sake get on board because to be seen to be in any way fighting the changes will not score you a single point with the public or politicians.

I've been a financial planner for almost 40 years and I've never actually met this mythical '4-day planner'. Where are they exactly? I'll happily comply with the new education standards (if that's what it takes to improve consumer confidence), but It's deeply disappointing that our PM didn't bother to qualify his remarks and instead chose to damage confidence further by taking the easy, populist path.

AlleyCat, if you are going to accuse someone of making exaggerated and baseless statements, best to not engage in the same behaviour in your own comments. 99.99% or what ever completely baseless % you wish to quote simply doesn't stack up to scrutiny. We all understand (should understand) the history of our industry and are well aware of the fact that minimum standards of both entry and education (let alone supervision) were and until these new requirements kick in, will remain a complete joke. By default this means a HUGE portion of practitioners operate with questionable levels of competency (if not ethics) and anyone with experience within the halls of wealth management, compliance or regulation knows this to be the case.

We need to stop with the 'its just a few bad apples' crap, it does the industry no favours (before you can solve a problem you must first admit there is one). 4 days might make for a great headline and its probably an exaggeration for that very purpose, but a few months of compliance training and then on your bike with AR status and a handful of PDS's is by no means uncommon it was the NORM pre 2007 and in fact I met 2 "advisers" just yesterday who did online RG146, 14 months experience running around writing risk and opening SMSF's and LRBA's off the back of property seminar referrals, they are not malicious (they know no better!) but 10 minutes into a conversation it was clear their competency is highly questionable but alas, these young guys are making a killing and their licensee is more than happy to issue them adviser of the year awards for their troubles. 0.01% of the industry...... not a chance.

What is this financial planner species they speak of anyway?
Not defined in legislation yet so maybe they regards some who has done a basis first module of a DFP a financial planner.

@ Phil,
He was also a shareholder in a cleaning business. So according to you,... he knows all about the cleaning industry.
Fair dinkum, you can't be serious !!
But he's actually managed to clean out a lot of Liberal voters from supporting the party.
Have a look at the last election,.... a majority of 28 reduced to 1.
It's hard to think Malcolm has ever got dirt on his hands. Maybe other things, but not dirt.

you're a funny one. Do you really think a multi-millionaire with an investment banking background would invest millions into a business he has no idea about or has done due diligence on the industry. Due Dilligence was his life as an investment banker.

@ Joe
Your comments are spot on.
Sadly some on this post just don't get it !

@ So what on.
Well I must qualify as one of those you're talking about before 2007, except I have tertiary qualifications, I did the complete the whole DFP 8 program via RMIT and Deakin Universities along with hundreds of others,

I went back to University to study Tax Law in my 50's and I became a CFP in 2003.
As a Director of a small Licensee, almost everyone in it, is either tertiary qualified and or holds a CFP designation or a Masters in Financial Planning.
I've only been in this business about 35 years and I'm sure some of the people you've met, fit your assessment of their capability and education level.
However having been in the business a bit longer than you, I've met more than the other type of financial planner who fits my 99.9% qualification criteria to operate in the business.

@Phil,
Do you reckon he knows how to use a
Hoover ?
People like him only look at P &L's and ROI's.
Integrity of management wouldn't enter the conversation.

My PS 146 (as it was then called) took one day to complete. Four on-line tests with no preparation. I just did them.

In the ten years since then I have learned a lot.

Add new comment