What's triggered the latest comments that it is talking to the Professional Advisers Association?
It says it's "at the preliminary stages of exploring how the two organisations might cooperate to further the representation of life insurance advisers."
This statement doesn't say that they are talking about a merger - although that is the immediate conclusion some draw.
For some time now it has been clear that the current leadership of the FPIA has a game plan it is working to which as all about trying to pull all the associations together.
Where this mandate comes from I am not sure.
A fair bet is that the comments yesterday are a kite-flying exercise to gauge the reaction of its members. After all the associations have been talking for some time - see this story.
It's hard to know whether there will be much response as there is very little detail to go on. (But if you have a comment email them to me).
Last time such a merger exercise took place (the creation of the FPIA by putting together the IAFP and IIAA) there was much acrimony and bitterness, partly because the two groups had reasonable profiles. The PAA, doesn't have the same level of profile as the IIAA and I would wager many FPIA members know little about it.
It's hard to focus on the opposition when you can't see them.
And if you go back to that comment "further representation of life insurance advisers" that could mean that the PAA and FPIA take a collegial approach on life issues.
Another idea worth considering is that the FPIA could keep its financial planning college and shift all its life insurance college members to the PAA.
There is some logic in this idea as it still seems - after all these years - there is some friction between the two camps.
Having separate associations representing the each of the personal finance disciplines (financial planning, mortgages, life insurance etc) isn't an idea that should be discarded outright.
What's triggered the latest comments that it is talking to the Professional Advisers Association?