Recommendations & Conclusions
8 items
6
Conclusion
Fifth Report - The Future Framework for…
Deferred
It is not clear to what extent the Treasury wishes to implement activity-specific regulation. While the proposal is a key aspect of the Treasury’s future framework consultation, when we asked the Economic Secretary whether the Treasury The Future Framework for Regulation of Financial Services 27 intended to move more towards …
Read more
It is not clear to what extent the Treasury wishes to implement activity-specific regulation. While the proposal is a key aspect of the Treasury’s future framework consultation, when we asked the Economic Secretary whether the Treasury The Future Framework for Regulation of Financial Services 27 intended to move more towards regulating by activity, he said it did not. We note, however, that the Financial Services Act 2021 already sets regulatory principles for the FCA to follow at an activity-based level in regulating investment firms, and it gives the Treasury a power under secondary legislation to specify further matters to which the FCA must have regard when regulating in this field. We conclude that the Treasury intends to pursue this policy irrespective of the findings of this consultation.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government is considering the committee's conclusions alongside consultation responses and will bring forward detailed proposals in a second consultation in the autumn, thus deferring a detailed response.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
7
Recommendation
Fifth Report - The Future Framework for…
Deferred
If done with a deft approach, there may be a role for activity-based principles or “have regards” to allow the Government to instruct the regulators, at a more micro level, how it wishes them to approach specific types of business sector. The Government can already instruct regulators more broadly on …
Read more
If done with a deft approach, there may be a role for activity-based principles or “have regards” to allow the Government to instruct the regulators, at a more micro level, how it wishes them to approach specific types of business sector. The Government can already instruct regulators more broadly on how to do this through remit letters. But the Government should be sparing in its approach: the strategic and operational objectives, combined with principles and ‘have regards’ that are set out in their remit letters, are already numerous and expanding, to the point where regulators have to choose which to prioritise on a regular basis when drafting new policy proposals. The creation of too many activity-based principles would add a further layer of issues to which regulators must have regard.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government defers a detailed response, stating it is considering the recommendations alongside consultation responses, and will bring forward detailed proposals in a second consultation in the autumn.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
8
Conclusion
Fifth Report - The Future Framework for…
Deferred
Regulating a company as a whole rather than by activity carried out should provide greater flexibility to regulators to respond to new activities as they develop, rather than needing new activity-specific principles or frameworks each time a new activity emerges.
Read more
Regulating a company as a whole rather than by activity carried out should provide greater flexibility to regulators to respond to new activities as they develop, rather than needing new activity-specific principles or frameworks each time a new activity emerges.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government is considering the committee's recommendations alongside consultation responses and will bring forward detailed proposals in a second consultation in the autumn, thus deferring a detailed response.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
9
Conclusion
Fifth Report - The Future Framework for…
Deferred
We will only be able to conclude with more certainty on the merits or risks of activity- based regulation once the Government provides more details on their proposals in its next consultation.
Government response AI summary
The government states it is considering the recommendations and will bring forward detailed proposals in a second consultation in the autumn, therefore deferring a detailed response until then to avoid prejudging the consultation.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
18
Recommendation
Fifth Report - The Future Framework for…
Deferred
The House could, if it thought it necessary to increase the capacity and broaden the expertise of the Treasury Committee in order to undertake scrutiny of financial services, expand the facility under Standing Order No 137A(1)(e) for non-members of the Committee to take part in certain proceedings. This provision currently …
Read more
The House could, if it thought it necessary to increase the capacity and broaden the expertise of the Treasury Committee in order to undertake scrutiny of financial services, expand the facility under Standing Order No 137A(1)(e) for non-members of the Committee to take part in certain proceedings. This provision currently enables only members of other committees to participate, but it could be adapted so as to permit the Committee to invite any Member of the House to do so.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government notes the committee's conclusion and reiterates that the appropriate structure for parliamentary scrutiny, including expanding committee facilities, is a matter for Parliament itself to consider.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
19
Conclusion
Fifth Report - The Future Framework for…
Deferred
The House might also consider increasing the resources available to the Committee if it were, as we anticipate, to expand its existing responsibility for the scrutiny The Future Framework for Regulation of Financial Services 29 of financial services. Although the Committee already has the power to appoint specialist advisers, there …
Read more
The House might also consider increasing the resources available to the Committee if it were, as we anticipate, to expand its existing responsibility for the scrutiny The Future Framework for Regulation of Financial Services 29 of financial services. Although the Committee already has the power to appoint specialist advisers, there may be merit in making provision for the Committee to have the assistance of the Counsel to the Speaker, in a manner similar to that provided to the BEIS Committee in its scrutiny of draft orders under Standing Order No. 141, on scrutiny of regulatory and legislative reform orders.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government redirected the recommendation, stating that the appropriate structure for parliamentary scrutiny is a matter for Parliament itself to consider.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
20
Conclusion
Fifth Report - The Future Framework for…
Deferred
We will continue to maintain an open mind as to how best to scrutinise the significant flow of financial services proposals that will be made by the regulators, and we look forward to engaging constructively with the Government and with others in Parliament once more detailed proposals emerge from the …
Read more
We will continue to maintain an open mind as to how best to scrutinise the significant flow of financial services proposals that will be made by the regulators, and we look forward to engaging constructively with the Government and with others in Parliament once more detailed proposals emerge from the Government’s consultation response later this year. (Paragraph 93) 30 The Future Framework for Regulation of Financial Services
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government deferred a detailed response, stating it is considering the committee's views alongside an ongoing consultation and will bring forward detailed proposals in a second consultation in the autumn, not wishing to pre-judge it.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
14
Recommendation
First Report - Future of financial serv…
Deferred
The Treasury and regulators should publish a forward-looking schedule of approximately when they expect each EU financial regulatory file to move across to the regulatory rulebooks, including timelines for consultation, and when they expect the overall project to conclude. This should give industry a better opportunity to plan for the …
Read more
The Treasury and regulators should publish a forward-looking schedule of approximately when they expect each EU financial regulatory file to move across to the regulatory rulebooks, including timelines for consultation, and when they expect the overall project to conclude. This should give industry a better opportunity to plan for the changes they may need to make, and give the various stakeholders (including industry, consumer groups, academics, and other experts) more time to plan their engagement in the process.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government notes the recommendation and recognizes the need to set out further information on the process of moving from retained EU law to a comprehensive FSMA model, indicating that it expects to do so in due course.
Read full response →
HM Treasury