In response to observations that the FSA stood by and did nothing (except fritter away our money on a multi-tude of other, mostly spur-ious, things) about all the warnings it was being given about potentially toxic self-cert mortgages, Jon Pain of the FSA is quoted as having said that the regul-ator does not want to “fight yesterday’s wars”.
Well, pardon me all to hell, Mr Pain, but isn’t that exactly what your organisation regularly imposes on the industry year after year with a succession of hindsight reviews of things that the FSA or its predec-essors are supposed to have regulated at the time but manifestly failed to?
The pension review, the split-cap investment trusts review, the mortgage- related endowments review, the MPPI review and now the pension switching review are five examples.
Yet, when the boot is on the other foot and the FSA is found to have failed to do what it has been hand-somely funded to do, the response is that you don’t want to “fight yesterday’s wars”. Neither do we. But, of course, when it comes to calling the FSA to account, it is always different, isn’t it?