“It’s about time both sides took a look at what’s best for all,” Coltman says.
He says that in an environment where compliance requirements are going to drive smaller operators hard, a supportive association that can provide clear educational pathways for advisers is needed.
“Financial planners and others in the risk management sector have a core purpose in common,” Coltman says. “It’s their job to offer good advice. To be able to offer good advice they need to be trained and qualified. It doesn’t matter who validates that training as long as standards are audited and are consistently transparent.”
IFA has issued statements to say it will defend its right to be the association to recognise international professional marks like the CLU and ALU designations and especially the CFP mark.
PAA says it can already recognise the first two marks and now it has the coveted CFP mark in its sites.
“This is a bit like old ivy universities saying no newcomers should be allowed to offer degree programmes, let alone be funded for research and development,” Coltman says.
“The world has moved on from ivy towers and what both groups need to recognise,” he says, “is that in today’s climate those in the financial sector will choose to belong where they find most of their needs are satisfied.”
“Some of us have multiple memberships of industry groups at the moment,” Coltman says. “A pan-industry Approved Professional Body would not only be more efficient for us, but more effective for the whole sector.
| « Tax changes to push premiums up | Sovereign takes regulation bull by the horns » |
Special Offers
© Copyright 1997-2024 Tarawera Publishing Ltd. All Rights Reserved