New FPA strategic plan gets the nod
Voting members of the Financial Planning Association (FPA) have approved of the association’s new three-year strategic plan that will raise professional standards and increase education requirements.
FPA chair Matthew Rowe (pictured) said the new plan was supported by 94 per cent of votes at an extraordinary general meeting in Melbourne yesterday, enabling transformational change and giving the FPA the mandate to aggressively pursue its vision of a genuinely professional association for members.
“This is the long-awaited beginning for our members to rebuild trust in their community that professional financial planners take utmost responsibility for delivering on a core promise of professional and ethical behaviour,” said Rowe.
“This requires all FPA members to not only act in the public interest, but be seen to do so. It also means we as a professional body will set upward education requirements, endorse higher standards and adhere to a strict code of professional practice.”
FPA chief executive Mark Rantall said the new strategic direction would provide financial planners with a consistent voice and build the reputation of the profession as a whole.
The meeting also saw the approval of the FPA’s intention to remove the principal membership category, which received 87 per cent of principal members’ votes. As a result, only individual planning professionals will have the right to vote.
Recommended for you
A panel of advisers have argued charging fees accordingly is a top priority for the industry, but Peloton Partners has found firms are reluctant to increase them until the business pressure is “unavoidable”.
Equal weighted ETFs are gaining ground with financial advisers, according to AUSIEX, as they believe they can bring balance to client portfolios.
Financial services software and technology provider Fin365 has appointed a new executive chairman to the board to support the firm’s strategic growth plans.
The FSCP has issued a written direction to an adviser who charged clients “extraordinary fees” for inappropriate and conflicted advice, as well as encouraged them to switch their superannuation into a poorly performing product.
