Proposed IIROC rule too lax: FPSC

minimum levels of work experience a standardized examination continuing education; and a code of conduct or ethics “Rather than recognizing that, IIROC has simply listed four certifications that they believe meet their own requirements,” he says. “Several of them don’t necessarily have the components of what goes into true professional certification.” As drafted, the proposed […]

By Steven Lamb | August 20, 2008 | Last updated on August 20, 2008
4 min read
  • minimum levels of work experience
  • a standardized examination
  • continuing education; and
  • a code of conduct or ethics

“Rather than recognizing that, IIROC has simply listed four certifications that they believe meet their own requirements,” he says. “Several of them don’t necessarily have the components of what goes into true professional certification.”

As drafted, the proposed IIROC rule states:

“(a) While a Dealer Member is entitled to impose its own proficiency standards higher than those noted below, any of the following, as updated or replaced from time to time by the applicable educational and trade Associations or sponsoring organizations, may demonstrate proficiency:

(i) Completion of the Canadian Securities Course and the Professional Financial Planning Course sponsored by the Canadian Securities Institute,

or …”

The guideline goes on to list several of the top designations, including CFP, PFP, R.F.P., or Quebec’s Pl. fin. List says he is surprised that IIROC has set the Canadian Securities Course and the Professional Financial Planning Course on a par with the professional designations.

“We would suggest that no single course of study, regardless of how good it is, is a sufficient measure of competence to hold out as a financial planner. That flies in the face of everything that professional certification is about,” says List. “The FPSC, for the CFP certification program, has over 30 approved providers of core education that meet our educational standards. IIROC has singled out one.

“Education alone is not enough, and we think it’s inappropriate that they singled out a specific education path to demonstrate proficiency.”

He points out that by simply completing the Canadian Securities Course and the Professional Financial Planning Course, a candidate for the CFP designation would still face additional requirements, notably the standardized examination.

After passing the exam, newly minted CFP professionals would then be subject to the designation’s code of conduct and be required to maintain their professional development through continuing education.

“[I am] in no way suggesting anything negative about the Professional Financial Planning Course, but that alone as a minimal standard, we say, is far too low a standard to be a financial planner,” List says.

Be heard on this issue. Join the Advisor.ca Forum.

Filed by Steven Lamb, Advisor.ca, steven.lamb@advisor.rogers.com

(08/20/08)

Steven Lamb

  • minimum levels of work experience
  • a standardized examination
  • continuing education; and
  • a code of conduct or ethics

“Rather than recognizing that, IIROC has simply listed four certifications that they believe meet their own requirements,” he says. “Several of them don’t necessarily have the components of what goes into true professional certification.”

As drafted, the proposed IIROC rule states:

“(a) While a Dealer Member is entitled to impose its own proficiency standards higher than those noted below, any of the following, as updated or replaced from time to time by the applicable educational and trade Associations or sponsoring organizations, may demonstrate proficiency:

(i) Completion of the Canadian Securities Course and the Professional Financial Planning Course sponsored by the Canadian Securities Institute,

or …”

The guideline goes on to list several of the top designations, including CFP, PFP, R.F.P., or Quebec’s Pl. fin. List says he is surprised that IIROC has set the Canadian Securities Course and the Professional Financial Planning Course on a par with the professional designations.

“We would suggest that no single course of study, regardless of how good it is, is a sufficient measure of competence to hold out as a financial planner. That flies in the face of everything that professional certification is about,” says List. “The FPSC, for the CFP certification program, has over 30 approved providers of core education that meet our educational standards. IIROC has singled out one.

“Education alone is not enough, and we think it’s inappropriate that they singled out a specific education path to demonstrate proficiency.”

He points out that by simply completing the Canadian Securities Course and the Professional Financial Planning Course, a candidate for the CFP designation would still face additional requirements, notably the standardized examination.

After passing the exam, newly minted CFP professionals would then be subject to the designation’s code of conduct and be required to maintain their professional development through continuing education.

“[I am] in no way suggesting anything negative about the Professional Financial Planning Course, but that alone as a minimal standard, we say, is far too low a standard to be a financial planner,” List says.

Be heard on this issue. Join the Advisor.ca Forum.

Filed by Steven Lamb, Advisor.ca, steven.lamb@advisor.rogers.com

(08/20/08)