'Overhaul FCA objectives'
Share
The Financial Conduct Authority’s proposed objectives need overhauling to avoid unnecessary complexity and perverse consequences, according to the Treasury select committee.
Current draft legislation gives the regulator the strategic objective of “protecting and enhancing confidence” and three operational objectives of consumer protection, protecting and enhancing the integrity of the financial system and promoting efficiency and choice in the market.
The TSC calls on the Government to scrap the strategic objective and add a fourth objective of promoting effective competition for the benefit of consumers. It adds that if the Government will not scrap the two-tier approach, amending the strategic objective to “ensure fair, efficient and transparent markets” would be an improvement.
If you enjoyed this article, sign up here to receive daily email updates from Money Marketing and Follow @_moneymarketing
Most popular
-
Standard Life to pay platform clients' 2013 rebate tax bill
-
Ukip calls for RDR to be scrapped
-
Aviva signs exclusive protection deal with Lighthouse Financial Advice
-
Celebrities and footballers ‘victims of £125m film investment tax fraud’
-
Govt warns of £4bn pensions bill from same sex marriage amendment
Most commented
-
Ukip calls for RDR to be scrapped
-
Nic Cicutti: Advisers must take responsibility for products
-
Money Advice Service calls for evidence to help form new five-year strategy
-
Standard Life to pay platform clients' 2013 rebate tax bill
-
Steve Webb interview: Govt reviews pension rules in fight against liberation
Readers' comments (1)
Julian Stevens | 19 Jan 2012 8:16 pm
A great deal more than just the objectives of the FCA/FSA is in dire need of overhaul. Apart from anything else, the FCA is set to be all but the same as the FSA, despite Hector Sants announcement that the transition from one to the other is going to cost a staggering £50m.
In fact, a great deal more than an overhaul is required ~ root and branch reform is a bit more like it, with priority attention paid to the regulator's total lack of accountability, not least the way in which it routinely pisses away millions of pounds of OPM without so much as a by-your-leave, let alone any sort of Cost:Benefit Analysis worth the paper on which it's printed.
7,000 pages of verbose and largely nebulous guff churned out last year from Canary Wharf ~ where was the Cost:Benefit Analysis as to the worth of all that? MIA as usual.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment