FPA seek CPD role within FASEA regime

The Financial Planning Association (FPA) is urging the Financial Adviser Standards and Ethics Authority (FASEA) to place professional associations at the centre of its proposed new continuing professional development (CPD) regime.

In a submission filed with FASEA on the proposed new CPD regime, the FPA has suggested that while it should still be open for licensees to approve CPD, it believed FASEA set the criteria for assessment of CPD.

“We also recommend that licensees can fulfil this requirement by adopting by reference the CPD policy of third-party organisations, such as professional associations,” the submission said. “Further, we recommend that for a licensee to approve CPD that it has been accredited by a third-party assessor, such as professional associations.”

Related News:

Elsewhere in its submission the FPA also urged against lifting the CPD requirement to 50 hours a year and instead, like the Association of Financial Advisers (AFA), urged retention of the current 30-hour CPD regime.

However, it suggested that higher CPD requirements could be imposed by professional associations in similar fashion to the manner in which the FPA treats those holding its Certified Financial Planner (CFP) designation.

“For example, the FPA requires CFP members complete 120 hours of CPD over a triennium,” the submission said.

The FPA said that while it was generally acknowledged that CPD programs in the financial services industry were more robust and of higher quality than other industries, the FPA had been concerned for some time that CPD is viewed by many in the industry as merely a compliance obligation, and that quality and choice of CPD programs and activities had been too limited for too long.

“FPA members also regularly point out that the current CPD regimes have created confusion and inconsistency due to multiple regulators, professional associations and content providers each establishing different CPD frameworks to comply with,” it said.

“The introduction of professional CPD standards set by FASEA creates an opportunity to address these issues.”

Recommended for you




FYI to be a third party assessor for the FPA the business entity have to be an FPA Professional Partner. To be an FPA Professional Partner the fees per financial year are as follows:

A Financial Planning Licensee/s with 1000 or more representatives $60,000 plus GST
A Financial Planning Licensee/s with 500-999 representatives $40,000 plus GST
A Financial Planning Licensee/s with 100-499 representatives $15,000 plus GST
A Financial Planning Licensee with 50-99 representatives $7,000 plus GST
A Financial Planning Licensee with <50 representatives $1,500 plus GST

The FPA have been charging for worthless qualifications and are a failure. Why should FASEA allow them to continue making money on the back of this failure. The FPA submission just shows what useless money hungry grubs the FPA are.

Seeing as the FPA has been providing these courses for years and the CFP even isnt going to cut it in a few years time they should get out of education and stick to lobbying for the members. Why cant FASEA set the CPD standards and just have a central source for education, we can do everything on line. Imagine the ticket clippers uproar! How can we be treated as professionals when our associations are not?

After all these years and the CFP is only worth a Grad Cert! All that marketing and raking in the dough and all CFP is is duplicating the validation of the degree one already has. It's a joke. Now they want to sell the assessing of my CPD to my licensee? Just shows they are all for the licensee not the planners.

While the FPA provides the free CFP to the old fellas (grandfathered) they cannot possible get any respect when it comes to training and education.

Dear Bear,
My CFP didn't come for free.
How easy out of ignorance was it for you lot to demean many, including me who haven't had the free ride or the lack of education you seem to think permeates through many advisers.
I had to do the complete DFP program via RMIT and Deakin University. I had to study Tax Law at Macquarie University despite the fact that I have an economic background.
For you and Anon, I've more than paid my dues !

Add new comment