Back to school: what advisers think of the new education standardsBY JAMIE WILLIAMSON | VOLUME 12, ISSUE 4![]() On 9 February 2017 the Corporations Amendment (Professional Standards of Financial Advisers) Bill 2016 establishing a new education and professional standards framework for the ... Get articles like this delivered to your email - Sign up for the free weekly newsletter More Articles |
Latest News
HNW clients value quality over fees: Praemium
High-net-worth (HNW) Australians who receive ongoing financial advice are more confident in their investments than those managing their wealth alone, new research from Praemium and CoreData found.
TAL launches new campaign focused on mental health
TAL has launched a new campaign, working with youth media group The Daily Aus, and partners with the AFLW, aimed at promoting mental wellbeing.
Selfwealth expands into full-fledged wealth platform
Trading platform Selfwealth has launched three managed portfolios, expanding from online brokerage into a wealth platform.
Adviser increase the 'strongest' since FY20: Padua WealthData
The number of financial advisers has risen to 15,169, with net gains of six new members this week, according to Padua WealthData's analysis.
Further Reading
Cover Story

Advice with soul
SACHA BURCHGART
FOUNDER & MANAGING DIRECTOR
BURCHEART PTY LTD
FOUNDER & MANAGING DIRECTOR
BURCHEART PTY LTD
Though she initially tried, Sacha Burchgart couldn't escape the call of a career in financial advice; it just took staring down her own mortality to see what's possible when you do things differently. Jamie Williamson writes.










It would be great to see common sense (aka rare sense) prevail. I have many professional friends in other professional industries and when you explain to them what new education standards have been mandated they all (without exception) disagree with making experienced advisers "go back to school" to attain a degree or equivalent. All of them reference what happens in ALL other industries and suggest that RPL's are a must. As far as an annual exam goes...it will be interesting how this exam is going to segregate the 2 very different disciplines...investment and insurance. Are specialist wealth advisers (who think they know what markets are going to do day-to-day) going to sit the same exam as a specialist risk adviser? My belief is that FASEA are lagging with their decision because it is too hard for them to create a protocol that is going to make sense while at the same time satisfy the plethora of regulating bodies. Does over regulation mean anything to anyone?