Industry funds deride Govt’s election promise on ‘experience pathway’
The Government’s proposed ‘experienced’ pathway for financial advisers has run into significant opposition from industry superannuation funds which have told the Government that it is an election promise without an evidence base and should not be implemented outside of the Quality of Advice Review findings.
Industry Super Australia (ISA) has used its submission on financial adviser education standards to argue that the proposed ‘experienced’ will undermine the transition of financial advice into a profession and, referring to pre-election statements made by the Assistant Treasurer and Minister for Financial Services, Stephen Jones, added that “an election commitment of itself is not justification for a change of policy”.
The influential industry funds representative body claimed the ‘experienced pathway’ would give rise to a two-tiered accreditation system with some holding a degree and some not.
What is more, ISA wants the development and administration of education standards by a body independent of the financial advice industry, “as is the case for other professions”.
“ISA does not support an experienced pathway for existing advisers. We consider that the law was based on a deliberate policy position, which was arrived at following extensive reviews and broad consultation, to impose minimum qualification requirements without reference to work experience,” it said. “ISA does not consider that a sufficient case has been made to change the existing policy settings.”
While acknowledging that some advisers had gained specialised knowledge through significant working experience, it said this was certainly not the case for all advisers.
“In addition, where some advisers may have gained specialised knowledge in one area from work experience alone, it does not necessarily follow that they will have the baseline knowledge to be held out as a financial adviser, a term which is enshrined in law as someone who meets the requisite standard across a range of knowledge areas,” the ISA submission said.
“This consultation paper seems to proceed on the premise that ten years or more of work experience will lead to the same level of skills and knowledge equivalent to the minimum education standards, but it has not provided evidence to support this premise. In fact, there are a number of instances where this will not be the case. For example, an adviser who has provided single-issue advice in a particular area for ten years, clearly will not necessarily have knowledge across all of the core areas equivalent to the relevant education standard,” it said.
The ISA submission said that education standards were central to the quality of advice provided by financial advisers and that, in circumstances where the Quality of Advice Review (QAR) is currently considering substantial revisions to the structure of the financial advice industry and the way in which advice is delivered it is important they be considered in that context.
It said further consideration of the education standards should wait until the outcome of the QAR has been resolved.
Excellantay.Get educated or get out. Greedy salespersons move on.
A couple of years ago I met a Financial Planning degree qualified adviser who told me he was looking to get an appointment with an industry fund… “because they’re the best”!!!
I see the love doesn’t stop there. Say “Hi” to your new bedfellows. 😛
Why Would you listen to a product provider who wants to water down the personal advice regulations?
Whilst they have a vested interest they are correct in what they say. At the same time they also have the ear of the government thanks to their contributions so let’s not pretend it is a level playing field.