View more on these topics

Baldwin calls on FSA to listen to MPs after parliamentary debate

An MP behind last night’s Parliamentary debate on the retail distribution review has called on the FSA to rethink the review in light of the opposition expressed by MPs.

Conservative MP Harriett Baldwin says the regulator should listen to the growing swell of MPs who are calling for the RDR to be reconsidered.

She says: “When will the FSA finally realised that it cannot keep ignoring the thousands of vital small businesses whose voices are now being heard. It is time for the FSA to come back to the table with a better plan for better regulation.”

“It is time for the FSA to come out and say they are listening and they are planning to act.”

She says the fact that over 80 MPs attended the unwhipped debate showed the level of feeling among IFAs

She said: “The RDR has mobilised a vast swathe of small IFAs to contact their MPs and ask for help. The House of Commons saw the full force of this in an historic debate.

“Last night we saw the full force of a new sort of parliament where MPs come to the floor of the House of Commons in their own backbench time and scrutinise financial regulation.”

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 5 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. whereas I agree that qualifiications are important this is not the only part of RDR that should be highlighted at this stage. Whether we like it or not most clients understand and agree that advisers are remunerated through commission when this is removed, due to the introduction of RDR, clients that are not used to a fee paying environment will not pay for advice and could therefore be disadvantaged. As a corporate adviser I have a number of Group Schemes and within them there are a number of clients that will not pay for advice and low paid members that currently receive advice will after RDR be excluded from this valuable service offered by there employers.

  2. Putting aside the exams & the renumeration arguments asside for one minute…

    My arguments against the RDR are:-

    1. The increased costs of regulation. The FSA & their successor are simply pricing the small IFA out of the market, regardless of how qualified, ethical they are. As the Chairman of the Treasury Select Committee said in the House of Commons last night – these increased costs will be directly passed onto the consumer.

    2. Stacking the odds up in favour of the Bank Assurance sector, who will benefit the most from the RDR as “restricted advisers”. It is the THIS sector that is generating the most complaints being handled by the FSO. NOT IFAS!!

    3. The Friendly Societies who provide financial products to the less well off are to be seriously disadvantaged or will need to close.

  3. I thought Heather Wheeler MP summed it up when she suggested that Mark Hoban has talks with the FSA to say that it is not acceptable to put up to 30 per cent of IFA’s on the scrap heap and not to reduce individuals choice where to go for financial advice, but that he tells the FSA to come up with a policy of choice and fairness not policies that are draconian, bureacratic, and Stalinist centralism.

  4. Should the FSA deign to offer to the Great Unwashed out here any comment at all on yesterday evening’s debate, it’ll be interesting to see. Were I a betting man, though, I’d take odds at 10:1 that it won’t.

    Come on Hector ~ prove me wrong. Or is it beneath you to engage in constructive and mediatory dialogue with the industry over which your quango wields such unbridled and unaccountable power?

  5. To Harriet Baldwin MP.
    Many thanks for bringing this debate to our great and democratic Parliament.
    Please keep up your good work.

Leave a comment