Regulation

Code changes rules around education

Wednesday 31st of March 2010

For the purposes of authorisation there has been an increase to eight qualifications and 11 designations which are treated as having satisfied the requirements of specified Unit Standards.

Additions to the original proposal include registered legal executives, NZFMA accredited individuals and the Certificate in Financial Services from Adviserlink for specific Standard Sets.

Code Committee chairman Ross Butler says the Committee got into the heart of many of the qualifications from a consumers' point of view.

"We were seeking to ensure those qualifications would give consumers the confidence and trust to know they were of a level and content in line with the National Certificate in Financial Services (Financial Advice) (Level 5) (NCFS-5)."

Butler says the listed qualifications came up regularly in the consultation process and he acknowledges that there will be a lot of other qualifications from other universities, training providers and from overseas that will have been left out.

"So we're asking the Securities Commission to make an assessment with applications from individual degrees that are not already mentioned."

A decision was also made around those in the process of completing their designations.

"There will not be any relief unless those advisers are at least at level 5 in the assessment process.

"This code is essentially a road code for financial advisers, you can't go on the road as an AFA unless you show you can understand the code, the act and the consumer laws."

The draft code has also introduced a sunset date of three years for qualifications currently exempt from assessment in Standard Sets C, D and E.

"We are hoping that over the next three years training providers would seek to move their qualifications forward so it is at least possible to identify components of NCFS-5."

Butler says this view has been encouraged by the Minister of Education who said last week that there are far too many qualifications in New Zealand which is confusing to students and employers, with a need for standardisation.

"In the future, someone doing these qualifications will be able to pick them up to see what they will need to do to pass the requirements to be an AFA as well as the other subjects for the qualification."

Massey University is working with ETITO and is already looking at launching a qualification which will be directly equivalent to the NCFS-5, before the middle of the year.

Massey University director of financial planning and senior lecturer in banking Dr Claire Matthews says this is because the higher level 7 diploma's it offers don't directly map over to NCFS-5.

ETITO manager of strategy and corporate relations Michael Frampton says nothing in the draft code changes the planning that has been underway for months or causes any concern.

"ETITO continues to work closely with the Code Committee in preparation for the assessment system to support the authorisation of advisers."

From 16 April, advisers will be able to make reservations for competency assessments on ETITO's booking engine and assessment will be available from 1 June with the exception of Standard Set B, which will not be available until after the Code has been approved.

Butler says as a result of New Zealand's competency requirements Australia is considering a move to meet an equivalent to level 5 competence to create harmonisation of minimum standards that apply in both countries.

"New Zealand and Australia have many of the same product providers and employees moving between the countries.

"There is already a harmonisation of protocols between KiwiSaver and the compulsory Australian Superannuation scheme and with documents to underpin public offerings. For financial advisers going between the countries we need that harmonisation."

Comments (5)
Ron Flood
Both Mark and Nick are right in suggesting a qualification will not guarantee consumers will receive better advice. What it will provide is more consistency in the process and practices that lead to giving advice. An 18yr old may have the qualifications but will not have the life skills and claims stories to tell that experienced advisers have. This will be reflected in the results they achieve. As the President of one of the Professional Organisations involved in consultations with the Code Committee, I can assure Nick that no one rolled over and went with all this. We fought hard, and are still doing so, to fight for risk advisers selling category 2 products only to be required to be Registered but not Authorised. This has not occurred so we have to 'roll with the punches", and complete the educational requirements set out in the code. Having completed these requirements myself (Only Unit Standard Set B to go), I can only say I am a better advisor for having done so. Having been in the risk advise area for 30 years, I know where Mark is coming from. All I can say to others in similar situations, embrace these changes, use them to your advantage and aim to survive in this ever changing marketplace.
0 0
14 years ago

Murray Weatherston
Answer to Mike Saunders Your CLU gets you all of Unit Standards Sets A, and E. It would get you Set C if and only if you also have a Massey or Waikato Diploma. Everyone has to do Set B. So you get pretty good reward in terms of competence from having CLU. See pp19 and 20 Competence Alternatives Schedule from the Draft Code.
0 0
14 years ago

Ron Flood
Mike Pages 19-21 of the Draft Code lists the Alternative Qualification or Designations that satisfy the different Unit Standards. The CLU, is accepted as an alternative for Unit Standard Set A. It is also accepted for Unit Standard Set C, provided it is accompanied by a Grad Diploma (Personal Risk Management or Financial Planning) Massey or a Post Grad Diploma in Personal Financial Planning (Waikato) attained before the sun set date (3 yrs after the code comes into force). For Unit Standard Set E, the CLU is a recognised designation. The CLU is a designation you should be proud of. In our Waikato area, there are only 5 advisers holding the CLU designation.
0 0
14 years ago

Murray Weatherston
For Mark Lucas Read the following which was on a competitor's website. You may find you don't need to be authorised at all, just registered. The Commissioner for Financial Advisers David Mayhew Responds This is a response from the Commissioner for Financial Advisers David Mayhew. Simon Hassan and Barry Read have got it right in my view. The question is not simply one of product - category 1 or 2 - but the service being provided. This is because the Act contemplates the giving of advice as involving taking into account the nature and requirements of the client and the nature of the service being performed. To give competent advice a needs analysis may be required, depending on the nature of the product; but that does not automatically turn the advice into a planning service. More is required for that to happen. Simply put, the more complex the service being performed, the greater the competency demanded of the adviser; and the greater the prospect of crossing the boundary into financial planning territory. So, to answer Ron Flood's plea for a Yes or No answer, a simple needs analysis for a risk product does not, without more, amount to a financial planning service. To use Murray Weatherston's question as an illustration: "is a term life insurance adviser who does a needs analysis supplying a financial planning service in terms of the Act"; my answer would be, "On its own, no. However, if the information disclosed as part of that needs analysis leads the adviser to decide to open up the discussion with the client into other financial options for realising financial goals, you are into a different part of the forest. That decision may in part flow from what the client was seeking in the first place - the sale of a product or advice on his current financial situation." Which brings you back to the service being provided - that is, the adviser's business model and practices.
0 0
14 years ago

Mike Naylor
Education vs Professionalism. Does anyone in the industry think that education by itself makes professionals? However education in what is meant by 'international best practice' is a key part of being a professional. Who are you to think you are giving the best possible advice unless you occasionally sit back and learn/think about the process of advice giving, and look at alternative methods? Once-off education is not enough - on-going updating is required, with the code specifies. Years of experience can be very useful - but are you sure there are no ideas you don't know? If you already follow international best practice then courses will be easy to pass. One of the good parts of the revised code is the focus on 'professionalism'. Everyone involved in the regulation process understands that education is only one of the ingredients for being a investment/ insurance/ financial adviser. This is why the code focuses on expectations of 'professional standards'. It is very very important that the industry does not ask the lawyers of the SC to specify in any detail what they mean by professional standards. This will only lead to them writing unenforceable pages and pages of out-dated & confusing law. The law should simply state broad principles and let the disciplnary committee of the SC (who will be industry figures) apply them. Professional standards are like porn - hard to define but easy to recognise when we see it. And yes - the level 5 is pathetically low - the SC recognises that. It is only temporary. The industry needs to start on the path to obtaining higher levels than that. Changes to the regulations around mentoring and/or experiecne required before you can be start your own firm would be useful to stop the 18 year olds. Dr Mike - Massey University
0 0
14 years ago

Comments to GoodReturns.co.nz go through an approval process. Comments which are defamatory, abusive or in some way deemed inappropriate will not be approved.