Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
lawyers weekly logo
Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
  • subs-bellGet the latest news! Subscribe to the ifa bulletin

FASEA grilled on education double standards

FASEA has come under scrutiny from a parliamentary committee for its treatment of senior advisers in its education standards, with a Coalition senator suggesting the pathways mandated by the authority give newer entrants an unfair advantage.

Senate economic references committee member Amanda Stoker asked the authority a number of questions on notice around recognition of prior experience for advice industry veterans within the education standards, suggesting FASEA had misled the committee around the extent of additional study required for older advisers.

“In your opening statement to the Senate estimates hearing on 27 October, you said 'of those advisers with over 30 years' experience, only 500 (2 per cent of the FAR) will be required to undertake eight units of study by the end of 2025.

“Given that only around 1,300 advisers on the FAR have been advisers for over 30 years, it is actually 38 per cent of this group who need to do the full graduate diploma, and this ignores the more than 7,000 advisers who have left the profession over the last 22 months in the face of FASEA's heavy-handed approach,” Senator Stoker said.

“Will you correct the record to provide a more accurate, meaningful and contextual statistic?”

In response, the authority said that as there were around 22,000 total advisers on ASIC’s adviser register, the authority considered that its data “presents an accurate representation of the size of this group as a proportion of total advisers”.

Meanwhile, Ms Stoker also grilled FASEA on its graduate diploma requirement for existing advisers, which was the same as that for new entrants changing careers into the industry with no previous advice experience.

“You have previously said that existing advisers get a two-thirds discount on the full degree requirement for new advisers, as FASEA only require them to do an eight-subject graduate diploma,” she said.

“Is it true to say that the graduate diploma is an option available to new entrants to the profession who are career changers, with no financial advice experience?

“If the answer is yes, and the same option is available to people with no financial advice experience, in what way does this approach recognise the relevant experience of long-practising existing advisers?”

FASEA said the graduate diploma pathway was available to career changers who “demonstrate they have an AQF7 or AQF8 level qualification, or a combination of relevant experience and academic capability judged to be equivalent”.

“New entrants would typically not have the minimum relevant experience required and would generally need to complete a FASEA approved AQF7 (bachelor) qualification,” the authority said.

“Conversely, existing advisers are approved for entry to a postgraduate pathway regardless of tertiary qualifications, work experience, equivalent learning or education providers’ postgraduate entry policy for non-relevant providers.”

FASEA said existing advisers could also gain credit for non-degree qualifications such as advanced diplomas and industry certifications.

Comments (38)

avatar
Attach images by dragging & dropping or by selecting them.
The maximum file size for uploads is 10MB. Only gif,jpg,png files are allowed.
 
The maximum number of 3 allowed files to upload has been reached. If you want to upload more files you have to delete one of the existing uploaded files first.
The maximum number of 3 allowed files to upload has been reached. If you want to upload more files you have to delete one of the existing uploaded files first.
Posting as
  • "..and this ignores the more than 7,000 advisers who have left the profession over the last 22 months in the face of FASEA's heavy-handed approach". Well no, people are leaving because of the regulation of the industry and because it is simply not a financially viable business to be in unless you are exclusively dealing with the top 5% of wealth. There just isn't much incentive for people to go through FASEA requirements. That is all down to the Government.
    3
  • Policies and procedures made up on the fly. The list of relevant degrees was being updated well after the date new entrants were required to complete a Professional Year. Education institutions were at a loss as to whether their existing courses met standards or required change. The whole education requirement was a complete overreaction by a government that wanted to bow to the public, rather than consider and put in place proper processes to ensure the raising of standards.
    Not just long-term advisers have suffered, but all advisers and those wanting to enter the industry (why would you?). And ultimately the customer will suffer, which is everyday Australians that were supposed to benefit yet due to ridiculous changes can't even access advice anymore due to affordability and businesses exiting this space.
    The exodus will continue and even with changes now, it is too late.
    0
  • I have counselled a number of youngsters that want to be advisers - my words of wisdom are simple - why? Go into law or accounting; I still love what I do and have done for 30 years now, but as mentioned earlier, it's not fun anymore; stopped being so about 10 years ago. I simply need to stay on. We are now more-than-ever keeping abreast of the mountains of red-tape than what clients needs us to be - their counsel. The 'scaled advice' discussion is simple, and i cant understand why all the brainiacs keep going around in circles - the compliance regime is not set up to allow it anymore because of the need to be able to predict the future accurately for the client, because 5 years hence, when the prediction is fogged up, the big brother overseers can go into the time tunnel (1960's-style) and pinpoint the failure and persecute the adviser.....why should anyone need to live with Damocles sword waiting to fall
    2
  • Where are new entrants supposed to find a willing practise for their Professional Year? What practise will be happy with taking a chance in training and mentoring an employee who doesn’t have any “earning capacity” for the firm?
    Professional Planner published an article about this predicament just last week.
    0
  • Let's remember FASEA consulted with the industry. The FPA "gifted them their FPEC" approved University courses with the recommendation that prior learning be worth 20 points out of 100. They clearly consulted and followed industry recommendations.
    0
  • Surely we're not still talking about education standards which are now crystal clear, set in stone and pretty much completed by any adviser who's serious about their future? Are the requirements fair, reasonable, etc, etc - not relevant, they are what they are, its too late now to change them and whining won't achieve anything.
    All this whining about something that just 'is' is now getting tiresome.
    Get on with your study or move on with your life away from this profession.
    0
  • I find it amusing anyone thinks that "30 years experience" in the advice industry is worth anything. It generally struggles to cover 10% of the fundamental knowledge in the newly required undergrad and post grad degrees.
    -2
  • I understand the education requirements as we want to be professional. However this exam still irks me. If you don't pass by the end of the year then you can't advise. Never seen this approach before. I've had arguments that doctors and lawyers have to do this sort of thing before they can practice which is understandable, but they weren't practising before having to do the exam like many of us. New entrants should do the exam...yes...but not already practising advisers. Part of the ethics course has an ethics exam which I feel is enough. The amount of stress (plus the cost!!) is totally out of whack. FASEA (govt) will make a minimum of $15,000,000 alone just from this but they can't get their monitoring systems in check.
    0
  • SENATOR STOKER.......I have worked in Financial Services for 41 years and am aged 58. I have been a self employed Adviser 18 years with zero complaints lodged against me. I have Bachelors Degrees in Accounting and Commercial Law, Diploma of Finance, Diploma of Financial Planning. FASEA deemed that I am not educated enough ??? FASEA say I must complete 4 bridging units plus the FASEA Exam to retain my licence past 31/12/25. I don't have issue with the FASEA exam but will NOT complete the bridging units costing $12K - $15K. I will therefore exit the profession on 31/12/25, some 7 years before I'd intended. The sad thing is that I am but one of many who will do the same.
    0
  • Have two degrees from 1970 onward, Public Accountant for 30yrs , Financial Planner for 20yrs and no one has question my honesty , integrity and ethics over my working life but I am finishing up thanks to Fasea, while CEO' s of major banks and financial groups just keep collecting their big pay checks and bonuses .
    1