At AIA’s recent Adviser Summit, Coalition MP Bert van Manen said while the FASEA regime’s implementation was driving an exodus of advisers, he did not agree with the idea of creating specialist pathways for different occupations such as stockbrokers or accountants in order to retain industry talent.
“We’ve got a lot of people who have been in the industry a long time who even without the regulatory stuff were probably considering retiring. I accept that it’s brought that forward and that will create pressures as we go through the transition,” Mr van Manen said.
“As we get new advisers coming in with better education and training pathways, ensuring they are brought up through that process of a broad base of experience and look to specialise down the track if that’s what they want to do, that will stand the industry in good stead.
“But it will take some time as we manage that process of transition.”
The comments come as the Stockbrokers and Financial Advisers Association called for greater professional recognition of its members within the FASEA framework this week, as it revealed up to 65 per cent of stockbrokers at major firms had failed the November exam sitting.
“FASEA has a view that financial planning is the only form of financial advice and they’ve treated it as the core education, when in fact financial planning is itself a specialisation,” SAFAA chief executive Judith Fox told ifa.
“So stockbrokers, investment advisers, accountants, risk advisers have all struggled because their specialisations aren’t recognised by FASEA.”
However, Minister for Superannuation, Financial Services and the Digital Economy Jane Hume hit back at the association’s complaints, saying overall pass rates among stockbrokers since the exams began had been in line with the rest of the advice sector.
“There is plenty of opportunity to practise it. There’s plenty of opportunity to do training around it. And the best firms are doing that,” Ms Hume told Fairfax Media.
“I can’t understand firms that have put their head in the sand. It’s a denial of the reality of the industry they work in.”
Ms Hume added that as FASEA was still an independent body, she did not have the power to compel it to make changes to the exam.
Well said
Who is putting their head in the sand here? If there is plenty of opportunity to practice for it, perhaps the senator would like to sit the exam, read the 4000 or so pages of “recommended readings”, peruse the legislation and maybe pay for the course to assist you to pass? This is all taking hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars and the end results are not guaranteed to improve anything except the wallets of the service providers.