Themes | Government Accountability | The Accountability Index

RFCA Governance & Oversight Inadequacy

Inadequate governance and oversight of Reserve Forces and Cadets Associations (RFCAs), requiring significant reform.

Source spread

Where this theme appears

This theme appears across 4 independent accountability sources, so the source mix matters as much as the headline total.

59 committee recs 5 NAO recs 1 DHR rec

Browse by source

Source-grouped records are useful for tracing where a concern came from. Large sections show the 50 strongest matches for that source; counts still show the full theme total.

4 sources
Select committee recommendations(59)— showing 50 strongest matches
#198 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: The sheer persistence of this problem in the face of various government initiatives over the years, suggests that there are significant organisational issues or structural issues or both in UK financial services and the relationship between financial services and the …
Response attribution not verified
#196 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: Failing to address the issues we have identified in this Chapter risks deepening the perception that there is a regulatory ‘risk premium’ or penalty that reduces the attractiveness of investing in the UK and poses a serious constraint on the …
Response attribution not verified
#195 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: Cumulatively, we were told these issues introduce significant frictions for firms, which in aggregate risk constraining growth across the sector. We heard that aspects of the UK’s regulatory regime that are more costly and complex than competing jurisdictions negatively impact …
Response attribution not verified
#194 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: Cultural change is key, and this must be set from the top. A culture of risk -aversion has led to a proliferation of regulatory activity that is duplicative and complex. We were told that the regulators do not prioritise the …
Response attribution not verified
#193 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: The introduction of the secondary objective has increased the regulators’ focus on the impact that their activities have on growth and international competitiveness, but it has also brought into relief long-standing issues that limit or introduce frictions to firms’ ability …
Response attribution not verified
#190 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: We welcome the FCA’s review of its handbook rules following the introduction of the Consumer Duty. However, we also recognise the cost and complexity created by layering new regulation onto similar existing requirements.
Response attribution not verified
#186 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: On 29 July 2024, the FCA launched a Call for Input to review how it can simplify its regulatory requirements following the introduction of the Consumer Duty. The FCA stated that it was aimed at identifying where it can refine …
Response attribution not verified
#185 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: The Economic Secretary told the Committee that the Government had engaged with the FCA over some of these issues, and stated that: “On the consumer duty, we have asked the regulator to look at the rule book and see where …
Response attribution not verified
#181 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: We also heard that the Consumer Duty had required some firms to undertake unnecessary compliance activity. Hani Kablawi told us: “We knew from the get-go that we do not have volume in that space. It is a retail activity, and …
Response attribution not verified
#180 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: We heard from witnesses representing wholesale business and specialist service providers that the Consumer Duty duplicated pre-existing fiduciary duties and other regulatory requirements that govern their relationship with clients. They told us that this introduced either additional compliance, or new …
Response attribution not verified
#176 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: We received a considerable amount of evidence critiquing the FCA’s implementation of the Consumer Duty. The Consumer Duty came into force on 31 July 2023. 268 The FCA stated that a key outcome of it was for “consumers to have …
Response attribution not verified
#28 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: We recognise that thresholds represent an essential tool for regulators to differentiate between certain types and sizes of firms and apply specific regulation proportionately. However, we received evidence that such thresholds can constitute ‘cliff edges’ which may hinder smaller firms’ …
Response attribution not verified
#27 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: The FCA does not do enough to distinguish between firms that cater to wholesale and retail markets, or market segments in its regulation and supervision. Consequently, this has imposed unnecessary burdens and frictions on firms that could constrain their ability …
Response attribution not verified
#23 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: There is a substantial discrepancy in the quality of supervision received by the largest financial institutions and the rest of the sector. Whilst it is right that the regulators prioritise the supervision of systemically important firms, this must not come …
Response attribution not verified
#22 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: We are concerned by evidence which indicated that there are inconsistencies in the quality of supervision. Firms should expect consistency in the staff that supervise them and supervisors who understand their business.
Response attribution not verified
#21 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: We recognise that there are differences between the regulatory and financial systems in the UK and Singapore, but we consider that there are valuable lessons to learn from Singapore’s approach which could assist foreign firms in navigating the UK when …
Response attribution not verified
#3 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: There has been a significant degree of ‘mission creep’ as both regulators appear to have increasingly expanded the range of their activities into areas of business management that are outside their core responsibilities. This has increased bureaucracy and imposed significant …
Response attribution not verified
#24 —
Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee
Recommendation: Publicly owned heritage assets are too often allowed to deteriorate, with responsibility spread across departments, weak compliance with existing protocols and no effective mechanism to enforce minimum standards. While the government has acknowledged the need to improve oversight, this must …
Response status not verified
#15 —
Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee
Recommendation: The government should review the effectiveness of the current institutional landscape for heritage, including the division of responsibilities between Historic England, English Heritage and other funding bodies. It should assess the case for greater streamlining, or even the merging of …
Response status not verified
#28 — Department lacks an overall HM Treasury compliant financial framework for RFCAs.
Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation: The Department told us that over the last two years it had strengthened its financial oversight of the RFCAs and that monthly conversations between finance teams meant that it understood performance and risks.45 However, the Department did not have an …
Response attribution not verified
#27 — Some RFCA financial reporting failed to comply with HM Treasury guidance.
Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation: Some of the RFCAs’ financial reporting has not complied with HM Treasury guidance and International Financial Reporting Standards. For example, the RFCAs’ accounts have not included a cash flow statement, nor have they correctly disclosed a defined benefit pension scheme …
Response attribution not verified
#26 — Department consistently failed to publish Council's Annual Report and Accounts promptly.
Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation: For the past four years, the Department has failed to publish the Council’s Annual Report and Accounts in a timely manner, and the Department acknowledged that the process was much longer and more protracted than it would like. It published …
Response attribution not verified
#25 — Unanticipated VAT liability reduced RFCA volunteer estate maintenance funds.
Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation: The Department had not anticipated that the RFCAs would be liable to pay VAT on work done through the FDIS contract, which has resulted in the RFCAs having had less money available for maintenance than expected. The Department explained that …
Response attribution not verified
#23 — Future estate optimisation phases lack secured funding and a firm completion timeline.
Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation: The Department has planned two further phases of the estate optimisation programme. It envisages these will consolidate some sites, establishing multidisciplinary super reserve centres with additional facilities such as car parking, accommodation and feeding facilities.34 However, the Department has not …
Response attribution not verified
#22 — Volunteer estate in managed decline, requiring optimisation programme to dispose and modernise sites.
Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation: The Department said that the volunteer estate was a critical enabler for it to deliver the ambitions for increasing the numbers of reserves and cadets set out in the SDR. However, the Department told us that the estate had been …
Response attribution not verified
#20 — RFCA service agreements improved, but lack clear escalation processes and accountability culture.
Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation: In recent years the Department has improved the quality of the five service level agreements (SLAs) that it has with the Council, which set out what the armed forces and Department require the RFCAs to deliver each year. The Department …
Response attribution not verified
#18 — RFCA governance and oversight require significant reform to support Strategic Defence Review ambitions.
Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation: The Department said it is now at an ‘inflection point’ where the governance and oversight of the RFCAs needs to be fit for purpose to support the ambitions in the SDR. In part, the Department intends to achieve this through …
Response attribution not verified
#17 — Balancing national oversight with local volunteer spirit is key challenge for RFCA reform.
Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation: The Department said that the challenge is to balance the need for a professional and effective national organisation that can be held to account, with the ability to leverage the membership’s volunteer spirit. It said that there was an ongoing …
Response attribution not verified
#16 — Establishing new RFCA NDPB remains preferred route, legislation anticipated in 2026 Armed Forces Bill.
Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation: The Department confirmed that establishing an NDPB remained its preferred route forward. This would facilitate a streamlined organisation, simplify back-office functions and clarify accountabilities. The Department said that the next opportunity for the necessary legislation would be in the Armed …
Response attribution not verified
#15 — Primary legislation for new RFCA NDPB thwarted by lack of parliamentary time.
Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation: One of the two headline recommendations in the Department’s 2019 review of the RFCAs was to regularise and streamline the Council and 13 RFCAs into a single NDPB. This would provide a clear governance structure that aligned with government policy …
Response attribution not verified
#1 — Committee initiated inquiry into MOD oversight and support of Reserve Forces’ Associations.
Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation: On the basis of a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, we took evidence from the Ministry of Defence (the Department) and the Council of Reserve Forces’ and Cadets’ Associations (the Council) on their oversight and support of the …
Response attribution not verified
#6 — Implement HM Treasury-compliant financial framework, publish timely RFCA accounts, and ensure future compliance.
Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation: The Department’s arrangements for monitoring and reporting on the RFCAs’ financial performance are inadequate. The RFCAs’ accounts have been produced very late in recent years. The Department published the RFCAs accounts for 2020–21, 2021–22 and 2022–23 together, in October 2024, …
Response attribution not verified
#5 — Integrate volunteer estate needs into defence investment plan and report on RFCA VAT progress.
Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation: The Department does not have a modernised and fit-for-purpose volunteer estate to support the enhanced roles of the reserves and cadets. The reserve training sites are the basis for mobilising the reserves, while having accommodation for thousands of cadet units …
Response attribution not verified
#4 — Detail plans to enhance accountability for RFCA performance under current arrangements.
Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation: The Department will need to continue to manage around the limitations of its current oversight arrangements for the RFCAs until it has established an NDPB. The Department has improved its oversight of the RFCAs since 2019, implementing around 70% of …
Response attribution not verified
#3 — Update Committee on progress establishing new NDPB for cadet and reserve forces.
Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation: The Department has not secured the legislative slot it needs for its preferred route forward, of streamlining the 13 RFCAs and the Council into a non-departmental public body (NDPB). Creating an NDPB requires legislation. However, the Department’s earlier plan to …
Response attribution not verified
#5 — Mandate a dedicated Scottish representative on the permanent Industrial Strategy Council in future legislation.
Scottish Affairs Committee
Recommendation: We welcome the establishment of a permanent Industrial Strategy Council when parliamentary time allows. However, while we acknowledge that there has been engagement between the council and Scottish stakeholders, we are concerned that the absence of a dedicated Scottish representative …
Response status not verified
#199 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: We received limited evidence on what the FCA and PRA could do to facilitate growth in the wider economy, or what changes could be made to regulation that would impact on investment in the UK economy as a whole. We …
Response attribution not verified
#192 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: Firms have told us that uncertainty around the FCA’s expectations on the Consumer Duty, including over which markets and customers it applies to is causing them to take an overly risk-averse approach to complying with the Duty, adding unnecessary volume …
Response attribution not verified
#191 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: It has been almost two years since the Consumer Duty was introduced—the FCA must work at pace to remove redundant or duplicative rules and requirements to provide firms with the certainty and clarity they need to maximise the Duty’s benefits.
Response attribution not verified
#189 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: The FOS and the FCA’s review of the redress system must result in clear actions setting out how they will ensure that there is a consistent interpretation of regulatory requirements associated with the Consumer Duty.
Response attribution not verified
#188 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: Should the FCA fail to address concerns about the Consumer Duty requirements there is a risk that the FOS may inadvertently fill this gap, potentially creating inconsistencies in interpretation of the Duty’s application.
Response attribution not verified
#187 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: The FCA’s implementation of the Consumer Duty has introduced considerable uncertainty for domestic and international firms operating in the UK. This uncertainty is driven by a lack of clarity on the FCA’s expectations as to how firms should comply with …
Response attribution not verified
#184 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: There was also considerable concern expressed around the way in which the Consumer Duty might interact with the FOS’s rulings. The FCA and FOS’s Call for Input on the redress system acknowledged: “A mass redress event could be triggered by …
Response attribution not verified
#183 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: Some witnesses told us that the subjectivity of the Consumer Duty has made international investors more hesitant to invest into the UK. UK Finance told us that, for the banking sector: “the subjective nature of the Consumer Duty generates uncertainty …
Response attribution not verified
#182 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: Some witnesses told us that the uncertainty around the application of Consumer Duty had driven a risk-averse approach. Monzo told us: “Consumer Duty’s ambiguity drives risk-aversion” and “the lack of clarity around their application is prompting banks and fintechs to …
Response attribution not verified
#179 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: However, we also heard from a number of witnesses that implementing the Consumer Duty has been difficult due to, as the Investment Association suggested, “the ambiguity of the rules” and the lack of clarity provided by the FCA. The Investment …
Response attribution not verified
#177 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: However, whilst witnesses supported the underlying objective of the Consumer Duty, they told us that its implementation by the FCA has generated considerable uncertainty. We also heard a range of concerns about the impact of Consumer Duty, specifically that the …
Response attribution not verified
#30 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: Firms should be confident that compliance with regulations and the law will be sufficient to avoid mass redress events, but currently that certainty and predictability is not guaranteed.
Response attribution not verified
#29 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: We agree that the FOS has become a quasi-regulator as its actions have regulatory impacts by creating precedents that the FCA requires firms to follow. The responsibility for issuing binding rules and guidance lies with the FCA. The lack of …
Response attribution not verified
#26 —
Financial Services Regulation Committee
Recommendation: The FCA and PRA must review how their supervisory staff are deployed to ensure greater consistency in the staffing of supervisory teams and to address reports of frequent rotation amongst supervisors.
Response attribution not verified
NAO audit recommendations(5)
Independent reviews(1)
Domestic Homicide Reviews(1)
← Back to all themes