Greg Pollock, Advocis’s president and chief executive officer, who was questioning White wondered why the financial advisor title looked like the “poor cousin” next to the financial planner title in Ontario’s model.
White said it was more difficult to define financial advisor than financial planner. He saw the financial planner as being more holistic – assessing risks and helping clients with tax planning – while not necessarily selling product. Financial advisors, meanwhile, could sell product, but needed to have a basic level awareness of “all other things”.
He added that Ontario is still in a transitional period and is grandfathering the use of titles.
“At the end of that period no one can use the titles who don’t make the grade,” said White. “That gives consumers what they already thought they had and they deserve.”
When Pollock asked why Ontario doesn’t have stronger penalties for those practicing without credentials, White said, “we enforce the perimeter. Our job is to stop people who are not credentialled from using those titles and we do that through compliance orders. If that isn’t effective, we will ask the government for more tools. But the government wants to make sure there isn’t an unnecessary burden.”
