“I don’t think we need a clone of the PFS,” said Robertson.
“Too many professional bodies would just further splinter the professional community. But like any dispute, there has to be willingness from both sides to move forward. It’s very difficult to backtrack once one side goes public and blames the other.
"We need a reasonable alternative which will unite the profession. Whether that’s the CISI or another body, I’m not sure. Any alternative would need to carry forward the PFS's legacy.
“We've worked so hard through the PFS to build trust with the public. This public spat could underdo 20 years of good work."
‘No money’ to set up alternative
Former PFS planning panel chair Alasdair Walker has raised the issue of time and cost in setting up an alternative body.
“Seed capital, hours of work - hundreds of thousands probably- who's going to do it?” Walker said on Okusanya's podcast 'Retirementals'.
One adviser, who preferred to remain anonymous, highlighted the same issue to FTAdviser.
They said that while they’d heard talk of a “rogue” body, no action had been taken to get this in motion that they were aware of.
“There’s no money to do it,” they said.
The CII has told FTAdviser its board “remains deeply committed” to its PFS members and “wants to see the PFS flourish” as a professional membership body.
The chartered body added: “It is essential that PFS members are now consulted, and CII staff are already supporting this exercise as part of their normal, professional service to the PFS board and members.
“The PFS and CII are essential voices for the UK public in these challenging economic times and now more than ever, all our time, energy and resources should be fully invested in building a stronger future, and delivering exceptional services, for our PFS and CII members.”
ruby.hinchliffe@ft.com
