The Association of Independently Owned Financial Professionals (AIOFP) is urging the next government to prioritise the mental health of advisers and financial health of consumers within the first 60 days in office.
And in an effort to safeguard the wellbeing of advisers, the AIOFP is seeking a number of certainties including a key change to the exam format to include questions specific to an adviser’s field of expertise. The body also wants to see the elimination of what it calls “the ambiguous ethical slant” of the exam content.
“The 60-day period is critical to the survival of thousands of risk advisers who are facing a ‘do-or-die’ battle with the last sitting of the FASEA exam,” said AIOFP executive director, Peter Johnston.
“This period is also critical to mitigate the current compliance regime that has driven up the cost of advice delivery to consumers,” he continued.
Mr Johnson also wants to see the industry-wide mental health problem “professionally addressed”. To this end, he said, the AIOFP will be seeking “some government funding to assist this process where suicides, broken families and businesses are commonplace”.
The director also revealed that the AIOFP board is scheduled to sit down with Stephen Jones in June to discuss the industry’s immediate needs if he becomes minister.
Shadow minister Stephen Jones has been busy wooing advisers ahead of the federal election in May.
Speaking at a webinar hosted by the Financial Planning Association of Australia on Monday, 2 May, Mr Jones said that the Labor believes “there is a need for us to put in place a transition arrangement”.
“So halt the large-scaled exit of advisers who are otherwise competent and have a capacity to perform a job that is needed to be done,” Mr Jones explained.
“I’m thinking largely of people who are in the latter years of the profession — they’ve had no problems, they’ve provided high level competence of advice, often thought of as mentors to others within the industry…”
Mr Jones added that Labor will also look closely at recognition of prior learning, which has been a specific area of criticism towards FASEA.
