Recommendations & Conclusions
7 items
1
Conclusion
Second Report - Edinburgh Reforms One Y…
Rejected
The full Committee has previously concluded in its report on the Future of financial services regulation that “there should be a secondary objective for both the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority to promote long-term economic growth” but that “pursuing international competitiveness in the short term is unlikely …
Read more
The full Committee has previously concluded in its report on the Future of financial services regulation that “there should be a secondary objective for both the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority to promote long-term economic growth” but that “pursuing international competitiveness in the short term is unlikely to lead to economic growth or international competitiveness in the long term if it is achieved by weakening the UK’s strong regulatory standards.” The Sub-Committee’s opinion is that completing all 31 strands of the Edinburgh Reforms is a vital step towards addressing examples of over-zealous regulation that disadvantage British companies.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the committee's conclusions, asserting that the Edinburgh Reforms will have a substantial impact, cannot be delivered faster, and are progressing well, with 21 of 31 commitments already delivered as of October 6.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
7
Conclusion
Second Report - Edinburgh Reforms One Y…
Rejected
While the Treasury has delivered what it set out to do in these six strands of work, namely publishing documents, welcoming a regulatory consultation, and establishing reviews or taskforces, none of these are in of themselves reforms to the UK’s financial services regulations. We do not consider reviews alone to …
Read more
While the Treasury has delivered what it set out to do in these six strands of work, namely publishing documents, welcoming a regulatory consultation, and establishing reviews or taskforces, none of these are in of themselves reforms to the UK’s financial services regulations. We do not consider reviews alone to be reforms. They are merely the preparatory work for future potential reforms. We believe the Treasury is incorrect in considering these strands of work as having delivered reforms. Only when the recommendations from these various reviews, taskforces and strategies have been implemented into regulatory rule changes can these be deemed to be financial services reforms that have been delivered.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the committee's conclusion, asserting that the Edinburgh Reforms are substantial and cannot be delivered faster, emphasizing that regulatory change is a multi-step process involving consultation and that 21 of 31 commitments have already been delivered.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
10
Recommendation
Second Report - Edinburgh Reforms One Y…
Rejected
Given that Parliament has expressed its will through the Mutual Deferred Shares Act 2015 that building societies should be able to raise finance through mutually deferred shares, the Committee expects the Government to address the lack of progress made on the secondary implementing legislation as part of its Edinburgh Reforms …
Read more
Given that Parliament has expressed its will through the Mutual Deferred Shares Act 2015 that building societies should be able to raise finance through mutually deferred shares, the Committee expects the Government to address the lack of progress made on the secondary implementing legislation as part of its Edinburgh Reforms work in this area.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the implicit criticism of slow progress, stating that delivering ambitious regulatory change requires careful work and consultation, and is progressing responsibly, with 21 of 31 Edinburgh Reforms commitments already delivered.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
12
Conclusion
Second Report - Edinburgh Reforms One Y…
Rejected
The Chancellor’s Edinburgh Reforms speech made big promises. However, from what has been completed so far, the Sub-Committee is of the view that none of the achievements to date will make a substantial difference to the UK economy.
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the conclusion, stating that 21 of 31 Edinburgh Reform commitments have been delivered and asserts that these reforms will substantially impact the UK economy and financial services sector, promoting growth and competitiveness.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
13
Conclusion
Second Report - Edinburgh Reforms One Y…
Rejected
Many of the strands of work included in the Edinburgh Reforms are not reforms, but are more preparatory work for potential reforms in the future and should be 28 Edinburgh Reforms One Year On: Has Anything Changed? treated as such. However, even among the reforms that we agree are genuine …
Read more
Many of the strands of work included in the Edinburgh Reforms are not reforms, but are more preparatory work for potential reforms in the future and should be 28 Edinburgh Reforms One Year On: Has Anything Changed? treated as such. However, even among the reforms that we agree are genuine changes in regulatory rules, the categorisation of some as reforms to be championed by the Chancellor as significant and worthy of attention is unconvincing. For example, it is not obvious to the Sub-Committee how a small £25 million tax cut such as the reform to Real Estate Investment trusts, or a change to the Investment Manager Exemption to include cryptoassets, which is deemed to have no economic impact, sufficiently meet the Chancellor’s description of the Edinburgh Reforms, which he described as “a bold collection of reforms taking forward the Government’s vision for an open, sustainable, and technologically advanced financial services sector that is globally competitive and acts in the interests of communities and citizens. These reforms will create jobs, support businesses, and power growth across all four nations of the UK”.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the committee's conclusion that many Edinburgh Reforms are merely preparatory work or lack significant impact, asserting that the reforms are substantial and that 21 of 31 commitments have already been delivered to promote growth and competitiveness.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
14
Conclusion
Second Report - Edinburgh Reforms One Y…
Rejected
The Sub-Committee understands and supports the Treasury in carrying out reforms that follow the appropriate processes. Reforms to the financial services rules should be evidence-based, taking into consideration views from both industry and wider society. This engagement takes time and must be done correctly, giving stakeholders sufficient time to consider …
Read more
The Sub-Committee understands and supports the Treasury in carrying out reforms that follow the appropriate processes. Reforms to the financial services rules should be evidence-based, taking into consideration views from both industry and wider society. This engagement takes time and must be done correctly, giving stakeholders sufficient time to consider their responses. Nevertheless, the time taken between the Treasury announcing a policy objective and the implementation of changes to rules has been too long. Often Treasury consultations end, and the next stage of the process stalls at this point, with Treasury responses and next steps taking considerable time.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the committee's conclusion that the implementation of reforms takes too long, arguing that delivering ambitious regulatory change is a multi-step process requiring careful work and consultation, and asserts that 21 of 31 Edinburgh Reforms commitments have already been delivered.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
16
Recommendation
Second Report - Edinburgh Reforms One Y…
Rejected
The Treasury and the regulators have told us the process of moving the onshored rules into the regulators’ rule books will take many years. The regulators and the Treasury must ensure that there is a sustained and focussed pace of change in order capture the benefits these changes can bring …
Read more
The Treasury and the regulators have told us the process of moving the onshored rules into the regulators’ rule books will take many years. The regulators and the Treasury must ensure that there is a sustained and focussed pace of change in order capture the benefits these changes can bring in a timely manner.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the recommendation for a faster pace of change, stating that the reforms cannot be responsibly delivered any quicker and are well underway, with 21 of 31 commitments already delivered.
Read full response →
HM Treasury