Legislation to make it easier for experienced advisers to stay in the industry has been passed by Parliament, following an extended industry debate on alternative solutions to retain experienced advisers.
Minister for Financial Services Stephen Jones, says in a statement that the new legislation will recognise the experience of financial advisers “…who have passed the financial advisers’ exam and have 10 years’ experience and a clean record, without requiring further qualifications.”
He adds that without these measures, thousands of advisers would be forced to leave the industry, pointing to the loss of over 10,000 financial advisers since 2019.
“Ongoing advice fees also increased by 41% between 2018 and 2021. This left Australians without access to affordable and quality financial advice.”
Jones says that by better recognising the experience of long serving financial advisers “…the Government is providing a pathway for experienced advisers to remain in the industry. This means that new entrants will have the benefit of their experience through mentoring and supervision, and more Australians will have access to financial advice.”
Heated Debate
Meanwhile the FAAA’s GM of Policy, Advocacy & Standards Phil Anderson acknowledges the issue has generated heated debate in the industry.
The move was first raised by the Minister when in opposition in December 2021. (See: New Pathway for Experienced Advisers Proposed).
Anderson notes that draft legislation went to consultation in April “…and the FAAA called for a sunset clause to apply along with completion of a mandatory ethics course.” (See: Support for a Better Targeted Pathway).
…it is important that the matter has been finalised and that a line has been drawn under this issue…
While neither of these recommendations were included in the final legislation “…the FAAA is of the view that it is important that the matter has been finalised and that a line has been drawn under this issue.
“We recognise that this issue has generated heated debate, however we believe that it is time for the profession to come together and support all those who will continue as financial advisers beyond the 1 January 2026 deadline.”
Anderson adds that the association knows there are many current members of the FAAA who will be using the EAP as their route to continue serving their clients.
“We also know that there will be some members that will be unhappy with these changes having already made the commitment to meet the education standard. To both of those, we say that the profession must continue to evolve and put clients first. The FAAA is committed to our members providing the highest possible quality of financial advice.”
Anderson states that it’s inevitable that this change will result in a number of members being uncertain as to the implications for them, or very disappointed that they miss out by a small margin.
“The FAAA has long supported better recognition of prior learning and experience and we will continue to advocate for this on behalf of members who miss out on the EAP, or who would prefer to take the path of completing the study required to meet the education standard.”
Can’t help but notice the vitriol that is being sprayed around ON OTHER BLOG SITES by those advisers who have the qualifications and don’t need to use the Pathway. It’s a sort of reverse Groucho Marx because they’re already in the club, but seeking to deny membership to those outside the tent .
Seems to reflect the type of weaponization of any issue we are seeing in The Voice debate. Are advisers really that intolerant of others positions? Does no one agree that “professionalism” (however defined) is a state of mind rather than an office- wall full of graduate certificates
There are many justifiable opinions and this debate will make some Advisers feel relieved, others angry that they were put through a huge inconvenience which cost them valuable time and money for what turned out to be more unnecessary work.
It should never have reached the point where bad policy forced thousands of quality Advisers out of the Industry, by ignoring their experience and hundreds of hours of ongoing studies, effectively treating all Advisers as cash cows for lobbyists to push their barrows.
The current Education pathway is a total barrier to entry for Advisers who would like to start in the Industry as Wealth Protection Advisers with specific education that is fit for purpose.
What this insane and erratic policy does do well, is to make it completely non-viable for 99% of eligible people who have life experience and want to work in a productive capacity, though are having the door slammed shut in their faces because they would like an alternative way to join other than the current University degree pathway that is NOT designed or structured for the work they will perform.
All the politicians need to do is ask a simple question as to how this policy madness has played out, which is;
In the last 3 years, how many people who did a degree, wanted to, or started and finished their degree, with the specific purpose of becoming a risk only adviser?
The answer is either NIL or at best, a handful.
So, with the Life Insurance sector having lost thousands of risk Advisers and virtually NIL new entrants coming on, it does not take much intelligence to come to the conclusion that this policy madness is NOT working and because of the current Regulatory impasse for new people to join, then it will only get worse.
Comments are closed.