Govt responds to IFA petition
Share
The Government has responded to an IFA petition criticising the senior management of the FSA, suggesting the new regulatory system will ensure firms are “responsibly managed and regulated”.
The comments come in response to the Independent Financial Advisors Political Action Committee’s petition to Gordon Brown, launched last September, calling for a change to the senior management at the FSA.
The petition received 550 signatures on its first day and closed on June 6 with 2,701 signatures.
West Riding Personal Financial Solutions director Neil Liversidge, who founded IFAPAC, said on the petition: “The FSA’s current policies will prove disastrous to both businesses and consumers alike and we have no confidence in the FSA to regulate either competently or fairly under its current management.”
The Government has now responded, saying that the tripartite system failed to monitor the financial system as a whole and there was a lack of coordination between the roles of the Bank of England, the FSA and the Treasury. It adds that the FSA’s approach to micro-prudential regulation was flawed.
The Government says as well as scrapping the FSA in favour of the Financial Policy Committee, Prudential Regulatory Authority and Consumer Protection and Markets Authority, it will keep a close eye on firms.
It says: “These changes will ensure that financial firms are responsibly managed and regulated. The greater stability and resilience of the financial services industry will not only benefit the sector itself, but also the wider economy.
“The reforms will also ensure that the conduct of firms, and with it the interests of consumers and participants in our financial markets, are placed at the heart of the regulatory system and given the priority they deserve.”
If you enjoyed this article, sign up here to receive daily email updates from Money Marketing and Follow @_moneymarketing
View results 10 per page | 20 per page | 50 per page
Readers' comments (22)
Evan Owen | 23 Aug 2010 3:10 pm
From a tripartite system where they all blamed each other for everything that happened in the past to er... a tripartite system where they will be blaming each other for everything which may or may not happen in the future?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Richard Brydon | 23 Aug 2010 3:33 pm
As the old saying goes: If things don't change, they'll stay the same.
Any organisation that has a title that includes the word "Authority" I'm immediately on the defensive.
So what's changed? No one will lose their jobs at the FSA despite the regulator's demise and it's musical chairs all over again.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Simon Kershaw | 23 Aug 2010 3:50 pm
I give up.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 23 Aug 2010 4:04 pm
As long as its governance from within the city it will always be ex bankers looking after current bankers interests. They have never had any ideas on how small brokers/ IFA'swork, and have no intention of ever doing so. Mr Sants oversaw the biggest crisis in modern banking history and was rewarded with a new job! Says it all unfortunately.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 23 Aug 2010 4:04 pm
Nochange there then,
IFAs will still get shafted.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Chris | 23 Aug 2010 4:14 pm
We have been shafted by the government and the FSA in the past and nothing will change in the future. What sticks in my throat is the governments response in stating that the FSA has been scraped and replaced. Do politicians really think we are that stupuid that we can not see that it is change in name only - The fact they have not intervened on Dual Pricing says it all. If that is not against TCF then I do not know what is.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Ironman Chris | 23 Aug 2010 4:17 pm
I notice you've given up Simon, I've lost the will to live
Instead of the same old answers lets have the truth I know they are as far removed as possible from this, but:
Same shop with a new sign will do, at least I'll know where I stand , in the dole queue probably
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Macbool Wahid | 23 Aug 2010 4:18 pm
with only 1% of complaints about IFA's it wonder that the FSA should be re-named at the BBA (Big Banks Admirers!!) cus that all they do, since its made up of ex Bankers!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 23 Aug 2010 4:24 pm
I am bitterly disappointed with the attitude and sentiment. It's almost as if the FSA were not really being responsible for anything. Just that the changes will make financial firms responsible. What about the responibilty if the govenment to make the FSA and new autorities responsible for their failings. They should all be sacked and never allowed to work again in the financial industry. The guys at the top and who left still got their bonuses. They should be treated the same as the heads of the failed banks surely.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Robert Donaldson | 23 Aug 2010 4:37 pm
As I have believed and stated in the past nothing will change and you can keep beating your head against a brick wall or live with it.
Look at it this way, you have your health can get up on a morning and go to work and try and earn a living what more do you want!
When Tony Blair is left with his new firm to deal with the general public, perhaps we will have some understanding within government and the regulators.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment