View more on these topics

FCA chief: New mission is not a ‘political shield’

FCA05

The FCA’s new mission statement is not meant as a “political shield”, the regulator’s chief executive Andrew Bailey has said.

It is also not about “repositioning” the regulator, but will better explain what the regulator does and why it does it, Bailey has said.

The FCA published the consultation today, describing it as a set of principles that will inform the regulator’s strategy and day-to-day work.

In a press conference on the mission, when asked if the mission is an attempt to move away from former chief executive Martin Wheatley’s “shoot first ask questions later” stance to be more cooperative with the City, Bailey says the consultation is not about repositioning itself as being more pro-firm or consumer focused.

He says: “It is about explaining what we do and how we do it. We have not written it to reposition the FCA.”

Bailey adds: “I have said before on the shoot first and ask questions later, I think there is debate around exactly what context the remark was made in. I don’t think Martin actually meant it quite in that way because we have processes to go through which have to satisfy the law. And shooting first and asking questions later clearly wouldn’t.”

Bailey was also asked if the mission is a “political shield” the FCA can use when something goes wrong.

He says: “There is an element of truth about it. I’m not sure I would use the word political shield. Because we have to make choices it is important we are transparent about the choices we make and transparent about explaining why the choices we have made have been made.”

Bailey adds: “We could easily come across a situation where we make our choices, we explain how we set our priorities…and something else in the landscape goes badly wrong. That can happen because unexpected things happen and I would not then see this as a shield in the sense that, ‘you can never blame us for anything that goes wrong in the parts of the landscape we have not prioritised’.”

“But it is useful in the accountability process to be able to say here is how we reached our judgements, we recognise that something has gone wrong elsewhere, we can look at why it went wrong because the Act provides for the ability to review when that sort of thing does happen. It would help to be more transparent about how we have made the choices we have in that situation.”

The regulator outlined several areas for consultation as part of the mission, including the circumstances it can intervene with unregulated activities.

It is also proposing a review of its handbook.

Recommended

Andrew-Bailey-BBA-Conference-2012-700x450.jpg
11

FCA looks to target unregulated firms in new ‘mission’

The FCA is eyeing action on unregulated firms and vulnerable customers as it sets out a new “mission”. The FCA today began a consultation on its mission document, a set of principles that will inform the regulator’s strategy and day-to-day work. The FCA says the purpose of the mission is to give clarity over the objectives […]

9

FCA questions its purpose, priorities and objectives

The FCA is to consult on producing mission statement in a bid to boost the public’s understanding of what does and its role within society. The mission, revealed by chief executive Andrew Bailey at the regulator’s annual public meeting today, will include a proposal to be published in early autumn followed by a period of […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 6 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Victim of dodgy claims 26th October 2016 at 2:04 pm

    Then financial services regulatory system is in place to deflect any financial mistakes made by governments. Eg who got the blame when the banks were failing? Answer the regulator. The government set up the system so they are to blame. However they are shielded from the blame. The F-Pack is a political tool…..period.

  2. Victim of dodgy claims 26th October 2016 at 2:05 pm

    PS it’s like the EU, not fit for purpose.

  3. He has to tread carefully, given that changing the culture of the FSA is a going to be a bit like trying to turn round a mighty oil tanker on which most of its crew are grimly and, in their own minds, untouchably committed to steering their own course at full speed without the irksome interference of any outside body daring to suggest that a change of tack might be a good idea as the ship is clearly heading for the rocks.

    At the very least, we hope that Mr Bailey will ruffle a good few feathers and knock a few heads together, starting with people such as Linda “there’ll be no loosening of regulation on my watch” Woodhall.

  4. Trevor Harrington 26th October 2016 at 3:12 pm

    If the FCA needs to explain it’s “mission” to us ….. I am sorry …. I have nothing to add …

  5. Mission: Impossible (or at least Highly Unlikely)

  6. A review of its handbook will be a great idea as long as the review entails covering it in unleaded and setting fire to it. Closely followed by a re-writing of the rules using some common sense and a tailored approach. Ie have different rules for different classes of firms. Ie those in the advice sector, those in the provider section, those in banking, insurance, stock broking etc. Rules that are relevant to each and regulation that is appropriate to each. That may just give them a good starting point. Not that I think they will do anything to change som of the 10,000 pages of cr*p they currently have

Leave a comment