Select committee: Financial Services Regulation Committee

Conclusion 5

1st Report - Naming and shaming: how not to regulate Published 6 Feb 2025 Paragraph 44
Conclusion (the committee's words)
In the context of its existing powers, the FCA’s explanation for how these proposals will further its objectives is unconvincing. It remains unclear why a broader interpretation of ‘exceptional circumstances’ could not be considered in place of the proposed public interest test, particularly where there is an immediate risk to consumers. The FCA have provided additional detail in the second consultation about other uses of the disclosure power. Following the closure of the second consultation, the FCA must be able to demonstrate that the additional detail it has provided to justify this shift in approach has reassured stakeholders that this change is both proportionate and necessary.

From: Financial Services Regulation Committee, 1st Report - Naming and shaming: how not to regulate, paragraph 44, 6 February 2025

Government response

No government response is linked to this report.