Time to address advice accessibility: Body

ANZ’s New Zealand managing director of wealth has backed calls from his colleagues across the Tasman for a national exam for financial advisers.

Wednesday, January 21st 2015, 6:00AM 3 Comments

by Susan Edmunds

ANZ in Australia is backing a national competency exam, higher CPD requirements and an adviser-funded last resort compensation scheme.

It made a submission to the Senate Economics Committee’s Security of Financial Advice inquiry, saying the moves would give consumers confidence.

It suggested the US Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s Series 7 exam as a blueprint.

It also suggested increasing CPD requirements to 40 points a year.

John Body, New Zealand’s managing director of wealth at ANZ, said he supported the idea. “It’s the right thing to do in the context of what’s happened in that market in the last 12 months.”

A competency framework was a key part of rebuilding trust, he said.

But New Zealand had already addressed competency with the requirements for a level five certificate and ongoing CPD for AFAs, he said.

ANZ encouraged advisers to complete a graduate diploma, he said, and the qualification requirements for advisers were one of the things that should be considered when the Financial Advisers Act comes up for review this year.

But Body said the industry needed to be careful not to make it too difficult to give financial advice.

“The regime has been going for four years and it is working. For the FAA review this year it will be a question of how we finesse the existing framework rather than a new framework.”

It needed to support advisers employed by banks and independent advisers, he said.

“An unintended consequence of the Act is that it’s got harder for New Zealanders to get advice, It needs to be easier. Now we’ve solved the problem of the credibility of the adviser market, we need to answer the question of accessibility.”

« Investors told: Don't bail out just yet

IFA working on pro-bono offering »

Special Offers

Comments from our readers

On 21 January 2015 at 8:54 am John Milner said:

John Body said "Now we’ve solved the problem of the credibility of the adviser market". I don't think ANZ's clients who had to rely on the Commerce Commission to get their lost funds back would agree with that statement. Same people in the same jobs. Whats changed?

On 21 January 2015 at 10:21 am Brent Sheather said:

Let’s be honest – much of this CPD business is a waste of time for numerous reasons. In NZ some CPD is sponsored by small fund managers with esoteric strategies moving client portfolios away from best practice. At the other end of the scale how many CPD offerings are sponsored by exchange traded fund providers? I can’t think of any myself – in NZ anyway. We all know that any CPD that advocates good behaviour where good behaviour includes minimising costs for clients isn’t going to be particularly popular. We got a whiff of that scenario the other day when we saw one CPD provider suggest that exchange traded funds weren’t appropriate for financial advisors. Good stuff, not. Last but not least many CPD providers don’t know what best practice looks like or, in some cases, what advisers do. Remember the CPD offering for AFA’s teaching them how to trade 90 day bills for their clients! Really relevant.

If the FMA and the Code Committee really had their acts together and wanted to inform themselves as to the reality of CPD they should mystery shop a few of the offerings then we might see some moves in the right direction provided of course that those people weren’t compromised themselves which narrows it down quite a bit! LOL.

Personally I think the best CPD would be a 15 minute course saying this is what best practice looks like and you better have a good reason for deviating from it and “to maximise the value of my business” is not a good reason. I’m not just thinking of ANZ and CDO’s here. This is a fun business.

On 22 January 2015 at 10:49 am traveller said:

The problem is that you can give an adviser as much technical ability and education as you like, but in the end it comes down to ethics. You can teach ethics but there is no guarantee and adviser will act ethically when the chips are down and there is money on the table. Read the article at the bottom of page 3 of today's business Herald. Just reports like that, whether true or not, turn off prospective clients.

Sign In to add your comment