October 23, 2018
Do you think FASEA's qualification requirements for existing advisers are fair and reasonable?
- No (76%)
- Yes (19%)
- Not sure (5%)
Advisers have generally rejected the notion that FASEA’s proposed qualification requirements for existing practitioners are fair and reasonable, despite apparent concessions to industry course work already undertaken.
This poll was released following Assistant Treasurer, Stuart Robert’s comments at the 2018 AFA National Adviser Conference relating to credits for prior learning/course work (see: Latest Poll…). Notwithstanding the Minister’s comments acknowledging credits will be applied for Advanced Diploma in Financial Planning and CFP/FChFP course work, two key outcomes have emerged:
- These concessions do not translate into acceptance by most advisers that the minimum qualifications proposed by FASEA are now fair and reasonable. As we go to print, 70 percent think the minimum qualifications are not fair and reasonable.
- There remain unanswered questions about whether any cut-off date applies to ADFP studies – and if there is a cut-off, what that cut-off date may be.
While the Minister indicated FASEA would be making futher announcements in a matter of weeks regarding future minimum qualifications for existing advisers, Riskinfo continues to seek clarity around the circumstances attaching to what prior learning, especially relating to ADFP studies, will (or will not) be granted credits under the proposed new regime.
In the meantime, we welcome your vote in this poll – given what you know today, and will stay in touch with you as this critical narrative unfolds in the coming weeks…