The Association of Financial Advisers (AFA) has welcomed the Government’s proposed education relief for advisers who do not have a degree but have been working as financial advisers for 10 years.
AFA president, Sam Perera, said the association had long argued for better recognition of prior learning (RPL) and experience, and that the relief would be warmly welcomed by the many advisers who would benefit, along with their clients.
“It is important that these changes do not undermine the recognition of financial advice as a profession,” Perera said.
“We recognise that this change may be disappointing for those who have already made the commitment to complete the additional study that was required. However, it is common to have transition arrangements when altering education standards, and this proposal will provide the opportunity for many of the remaining advisers to stay in the profession.
“This is a good outcome for them and their clients, who will be able to retain access to financial advice.”
The AFA noted it had supported an increase in education standards for advisers including the degree requirement but always envisaged a model where a higher standard would be achieved without the expense of losing so many experienced advisers.
“The proposal significantly increases the eligibility criteria and simplifies the assessment of compliance with the education standard,” Perera said.
“The criteria related to the avoidance of any sanction between now and 1 January, 2026, will create an important risk that advisers will need to be very conscious of.”
The Financial Planning Association (FPA) chair, Marisa Broome, also said her association had always supporter planners being required to achieve higher levels of education and remain in the profession.
“We believe that there should be flexibility and recognition of experience in meeting those requirements and that great care should be taken with any proposal to amend education standards,” Broome said.
“We look forward to reviewing the details in the new consultation paper and will be seeking feedback from members.”
The Stockbrokers and Financial Advisers Association (SAFAA) also welcomed the relief and said it restored “common sense to education standards” and restored Parliament’s intent that a degree or degree equivalent was required along with deep experience and prior learning being recognised as a degree equivalent.
SAFAA chief executive, Judith Fox, said: “It was the standards authority — a bureaucracy that was averse to stakeholder engagement — that narrowed the scope of recognised qualifications. It deemed a range of advisers with degrees best suited to stockbroking and investment advice as unqualifed and skills, knowledge and experience unsuitable for recognition.
She noted the impact of the existing education standards not only caused an exodus of experience, but also drove up the cost of advice and discouraged graduates from entering the profession, as they found their degrees were not accepted.
“Investment advisers have significant undergraduate and postgraduate education qualifications in commerce, economics, finance and business from Australia’s most established universities,” Fox said.
“The government’s proposals recognise that universities — rather than government — are best placed to design and accredit degrees suitable for professions.
“It would be inconceivable to propose that High Court judges were unqualified because their degrees date from the 1980s… Yet the standards authority made such a determination in relation to degrees relevant to the investment profession.”
