View more on these topics

Govt responds to IFA petition

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.”

Recommended

Health - thumbnail

Absence management systems gone AWOL from UK’s SMEs, reports Jelf

A quarter (23 per cent)* of the UK’s small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) do not have an absence management system in place, according to new research from Jelf Employee Benefits. Despite 69 per cent* of organisations having a system in place, three-quarters (75 per cent) report that it is not providing them with sufficiently empowering absence or health data to inform an effective wellbeing programme.

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 22 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. 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?

  2. 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.

  3. I give up.

  4. 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.

  5. Nochange there then,
    IFAs will still get shafted.

  6. 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.

  7. 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

  8. 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!

  9. Jennifer Nicholls 23rd August 2010 at 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.

  10. Robert Donaldson 23rd August 2010 at 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.

  11. Surley there must be another way. We must be able to be noticed by government and be able to get them to see that ordinary folk are going to lose access to independent advice, that home buyers are going to lose access to competitive mortgage deals, competitive life assurance rates etc. and they are going to be continuiously shafted by banks when obtaining their financial products. Currently it is like ‘peeing into the wind’ to have our case put across.
    Our AIFA’s and networks just pay lip service to us and blindly let the FSA crush us underfoot. Could we not all gather at Downing Street in the full light of the meda which would then give our concerns ‘air’ and I’m sure that if everyone realised what they were about to loose, they would be up in arms.

  12. The response should have read:

    “These changes will ensure that Banks 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 banks, 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.”

    So why didn’t it…

  13. Scarlet Pimpernel 23rd August 2010 at 5:29 pm

    Hector Sants will always have that FIXED GRIN; fixed on his face, as he thinks, how daft we all are; i.e. the Government, the Insurance Companies, Intermediaries, and Broker; are for letting; him & the FSA continue wasting Millions of pounds of our money; but his alright Jack!
    He is laughing all the way to BANK£££££££££££££££££££££££££££££.
    So next time you see is Grin; you know what he is thinking!
    And Government are normally that slow in thinking, that they will realise in Five years time; that is was all a waist of Money again!

  14. Having read the response, it looks to me like nothing more than a restatement of policy already announced. It says nothing new at all.

    I have seen nothing in the Statutory Code of Practice for Regulators which would inhibit a decent regulator from fulfilling its statutory (that word again, despite Hector Sants’ claim that the FSA is completely independent of government) objectives.

    But no one in government or the regulatory community seems prepared to acknowledge that the Code even exists, which is very strange.

    I wrote to my MP complaining that the FSA ignores the Code and that no attempt is made to enforce it. Eventually I received a reply from him along with a copy of the reply he had received on the subject from, all parties, the FSA! What the hell was the use of writing to the FSA about the fact that it ignores the Code and that no other body makes any attempt to hold it to account for so doing? What did he expect the FSA to say? Yes, we’re very sorry, we’ll make the Code mandatory reading for all our staff and try to do better in the future?

    Nowhere in either items of correspondence could I trace any mention whatsoever of the Code ~ it was all just waffle and bullshit, the usual politicians’ and regulator’s fare.

    There’s something very strange going on here, but I refuse to give up. Maybe Godfrey Bloom’s input could help penetrate the thicket of obfuscation.

    Read the Code, see what you think of it, and then write to your MP about it.

  15. Personally I am just relieved to see the end of the FSA (sadly not apparently the end of Mr Sants but if I read the food chain correctly he is not in the sector that will be dealing with IFAs so let’s be grateful for small mercies. I will remember his performance in front of the Parliamentary committee for a long time).

    If the statement from HMG means what it says-big if, admittedly- perhaps the criteria that are supposed to bind the FSA and that Julian has mentioned at length will be implemented at last. Let us wait and see.

    The staff at the FSA have NOT automatically been transferred although in many cases it would be no problem if they did. I have had several dealings with FSA staff at what might be called grass roots level and had few problems. But we have an FSA staff member as a client and she is waiting to be told if she still has a job; so apparently are many of her colleagues.

  16. J Alan Campbell 23rd August 2010 at 6:57 pm

    So what did we expect from such a derisory response, after all there were only 2701 IFAs who bothered to sign the petition. With in excess of 30000 registerd advisers this means that 90% must be satisfied with the IFA. Fow goodness sake what is wrong with us. There cannot be many who are really happy with the FSA or for that matter the way the Lenders, especially the banks, operate. So what do we do about it, the vast majority of us could not even be bothered to sign the petition, so I suppose that 90% of us must be happy to sit on our hands moaning about how bad things are, until it is impossible to write business. Its time that the Networks started earning the massive amounts they manage to earn on our backs and present a united front in responding to the FSA, backed by ourselves getting onto our own MPs. Yes its time for a truley united effort.

  17. Robert Donaldson, the day you believe you should just live with it is the day you accept an Orwelian state of mind. If you want to accept defeat then fine, but I don’t believe that is the way we should be living and working in the 21st century. Yes it is much easier to do that but how can we live with ourselves if we just accept all the crap that is thrown at us without even so much as a whimper.
    As much as I feel like throwing the towel in I just can’t accept the way we are being bullied like a bunch of mealy mouthed schoolchildern.

  18. No surprises here then, however I commented a number of months ago that a person from the Treasury advised me that the EU’s main aim ws to get rid of IFA’s altogether as they don;t exist in Europe and the EU’s view is we are too onerous to control. After reading European Regulatory Bodies in RO1 chapter 1 handbook, I fear this is on the agenda. After 28 years in the industry I am so disappointed at the total lack of ‘guts’ in IFA’s to fight back. We have allowed all and sundry to walk all over us for too long. Are we really all running scared from the FSA????????????

  19. With reference to the 2701 advisers on the petition compared with in excess of 30,000 advisers out there. I think it comes back to the same old thing some are prepared to put their heads over the parapet and others are not(for their own reasons) You will no doubt notice that where named, the majority of people commenting on the blogs are the same people. This is not down to just whinging or they have not got anything to do, it is down to them protecting a much maligned industry (us the IFAS)

  20. to Fiona – NO we are not all, but you have to be willing to loose a battle and be a casualty in order to win a war. It reminds me of one of those quatermass series in the 1980’s, where they sent up a nuke in to space against the enemy and although it felt like a bee sting to the thing in space, it was enough for them to move on to easier pickings.
    I’ve posted anon here, which is unusual for me…. simply because I don’t want them to know I am happy to loose if they have a go at me until they try…..

  21. The chosen one will be involved still so this new lot are no different to Nu Labour.

  22. I have seen FIMBRA,The PIA,The FSA now….same faces different name over the shop, same bonuses perhaps?

Leave a comment