View more on these topics

MPs set to grill man behind closed book inquiry

MPs are set to question the author of an imminent report into how the FCA handled its annoucement of a review of the closed book industry.

The Treasury select committee has called an evidence session with Clifford Chance partner Simon Davis, who is carrying out an independent inquiry into how the FCA announced its closed book review in March. 

Following a report in The Daily Telegraph, insurers’ shares tumbled in the six hours it took for the regulator to release a clarification statement.

TSC chair Andrew Tyrie says: “Serious concerns have been raised – not least in Parliament – about the way that the FCA has approached its responsibilities since it was formed in April 2013.

“At first glance the changes announced this week look substantial. The Treasury committee and others will need to examine in detail the FCA’s strategic review, and this consequent restructuring, to see whether they address the concerns raised.

“It is also crucial that the FCA learns any lessons that emerge from Mr Davis’s report. The Committee intends to take evidence on both the pre-briefing inquiry and the strategic review in the coming weeks, initially from Mr Davis on his report on Wednesday afternoon.”

The regulator’s senior managers are expected to be summoned to the Treasury select committee before Christmas to discuss the report’s findings.

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 3 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. But what will or can the TSC do is it’s not satisfied with Mr Davis’ evidence? Nothing at all. There’ll just be the usual bit of frowning and finger-wagging and that’ll be that. More pertinent is the £2.1m+ wasted on this review, particularly as Adamson has been forced to quit, which he should have been before it was ever embarked upon.. How can the FCA possibly justify such a massive expenditure on something of which the outcome is a foregone conclusion?

  2. Whilst I think the FCA were right to call for an independent review into this matter, they should never have been allowed to have had anything to do with picking the law firm, nor should they have been allowed to have any input into the terms of reference. Both of these should have been done outside of the FCA.

    What I think is despicable is the fact that the FCA spent upwards of £700k on legal fees for their employees. That is just disgusting. How that was ever allowed to happen is beyond any rational thinking persons capability.

  3. Marty ~ It’s the same old perennial problem. The FCA does more or less whatever it wants without having to answer to anybody (except, in this particular case, the consequences of Adamson’s gaffe were so serious as to prompt a letter from George Osborne to Martin Wheatley demanding to know what the hell was going on). Nobody guards the guards. The TSC may ask a few sticky questions from time to time, but the bottom line is that it has no powers whatsoever to impose its will if it’s not satisfied with the answers it receives.

Leave a comment