header-logo header-logo

Twin peaks regulation

30 March 2012 / Paul Adams , Lista M Cannon
Issue: 7507 / Categories: Opinion , Regulatory
printer mail-detail

Will the proposed changes to financial regulation work, ask Lista M Cannon & Paul Adams

Since the start of the financial crisis in 2007, the “tripartite” model of financial regulation, which saw responsibility for financial regulation shared between HM Treasury, the Bank of England and the Financial Services Authority (FSA), has been widely criticised for its inability to prevent, and effectively deal with, the financial crisis. Under the tripartite model, the FSA has responsibility for:

  • the direct supervision of all regulated firms for both prudential and conduct of business purposes; and
  • taking enforcement action against firms where it identifies regulatory failures.

The FSA’s “light touch” approach to regulation was widely criticised as inadequate and the decision was taken that its operating model needed to change.

On 27 January 2012, the government published the Financial Services Bill (the Bill). The Bill will introduce a new model of firm-specific regulation which will see the separation of “micro-prudential” regulation (or the regulation of individual firms’ financial stability through the monitoring and assessment of

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll