1,700 FPA members air FASEA concerns
The Financial Planning Association (FPA) has unsurprisingly had an overwhelming response to its questionnaire on the Financial Adviser Standards and Ethics Authority’s education reforms, with 1,700 members taking the chance to voice their anger within 24 hours of it opened.
The feedback received thus far confirmed the FPA’s concerns that the FASEA proposals were “over-engineered” and would lead to less access to advice and higher costs for consumers.
Many of those who responded to the survey called for a more realistic approach to prior recognition of existing financial planning study, reflecting months of industry criticism regarding FASEA’s approach to this.
“The FPA and many others in the financial planning profession have spent 20 years building a culture of learning amongst planners. These announcements by FASEA and a refusal to acknowledge the study done in advanced diplomas and the Certified Financial Planner Certification Program will undermine that learning culture if it is not reviewed,” FPA chair Neil Kendall said.
The FPA reinforced that the education proposals were only part of the FASEA regime, pointing out that the exam requirement would also ensure that advisers had sufficient knowledge.
“The education proposals from FASEA seem to ignore that every single financial adviser in the country needs to pass an exam as well, putting in place a failsafe should anyone slip through the education standards without the appropriate knowledge,” the Association said.
The FPA had asked FASEA a number of questions to help clarify the Authority’s proposals and positions but are yet to receive a response.
AUTHOR
Hannah Wootton
Recommended for you
As the industry navigates the fallout from recent product failures, two major AFSLs have detailed their APL selection process and relationship with research houses, warning a selection error could “destroy” a licensee.
The impending retirement of financial advisers in their 50s could see the profession face significant succession challenges over the coming decade and younger advisers may not be the answer.
With a third of AFSLs being solo advisers, how can they navigate key person risk and ensure they are still attractive propositions for buyers when it comes to their succession planning?
A quarter of advisers who commenced on the FAR within the last two years have already switched licensees or practices, adding validity to practice owners’ professional year (PY) concerns.
