Questions raised over FASEA approval process
Adrian Raftery, associate professor of the financial planning program at Deakin University, said he was critical of how FASEA handled accreditation process.
“Deakin business school is delighted that we had two versions of our graduate diploma approved as well as our three bridging courses, as well as historical diplomas going back to 2006,” Raftery said.
“I was dismayed with what appears to be preferential treatment with some institutions with approvals with TPB (Tax Practitioner Board) sign-off and a clear blatant disregard to the alignment of certain subject outlines compared to FASEA’s clear Curriculum guidelines for bridging courses.”
“I have seen a few instances where bridging courses that were put forward to FASEA - and subsequently approved – that are clearly commercial and business law subjects, and not financial advice law subjects.”
There was also the omission of certain courses that were expected to have been approved during the current approval process.
This included Deakin’s Master of Financial Planning, which was submitted in the same application as the graduate diploma.
“I am surprised that we are waiting on FASEA Approval for more Professional Designations by Coursework such as CFP 1-4, FChFP and CPA because I understand that these were submitted several months ago by the respective professional bodies,” Raftery.
“I was also surprised by one admission and that was the Ethics Centre as they were on record on Money Management only a month ago saying they had an accredited FASEA ethics bridging course.”
“And I know Stephen Glenfield [FASEA chief executive officer] did a subsequent clarification that there was no bridging courses approved at that stage, so I was expecting the Ethics Centre to have that course approved so it was a surprise it was omitted.”
Recommended for you
Government has introduced a bill to Parliament to legislate the first stream of the QAR reforms.
ASIC now has a 1:1 ratio when it comes to court success in the enforcement of crypto activities and more action is expected as Treasury seeks to introduce a regulatory framework.
A leading governance body has hit out at “specialist interest groups proposing ad hoc law reform” when it comes to reforms of financial services legislation and believes an independent body is needed.
The release of ALRC’s final report into financial services legislation has highlighted financial advice as a “significant” focus as it seeks to reduce costs and help advisers understand their obligations, alongside the Quality of Advice Review.
