header-logo header-logo

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

Twin peaks regulation

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 the risks they take on their balance sheets) and conduct regulation

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

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll