This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Find out more here.
X
MM+cover+small+180914
Categories:Politics,Regulation

'Overhaul FCA objectives'

  • Print
  • Comments (1)

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.

  • Print
  • Comments (1)

Daily Email Updates
If you enjoyed this article, sign up to receive the latest news and analysis from Money Marketing.

The Money Marketing CPD Centre
Build your annual CPD - you can log and plan your CPD hours for free with The Money Marketing CPD Centre.

Taxbriefs Advantage
Advantage is a digital reference source giving unbiased, independent, answers to your technical queries. Subscribe to Taxbriefs Advantage.

Readers' comments (1)

  • 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

Have your sayEdit my profile/screen name

You must sign in to make a comment

Fund Data

Editor's Pick



Poll

Have you heard of cases of advised sales being disguised as execution-only?

Job of the week

Latest jobs

View all jobs

Most recent comments

View more comments