Global Trustee and Fiduciary Services News and Views

62 / 72

Markets and Securities Services | United Kingdom 60
1 See
cmselect/cmtreasy/582/582.pdf, last downloaded on 23
November 2016.
2 See
uploads/attachment_data/file/389063/enforcement_review_
response_final.pdf, last downloaded on 23 November 2016.
3 See
publications/reports/agreenreport.pdf, last downloaded on
23 November 2016.
4 See http:
committees-a-z/joint-select/professional-standards-in-the-
banking-industry/news/changing-banking-for-good-report/,
last accessed on 23 November 2016.
5 See
the-global-race-2/, last accessed on 23 November 2016.
6 Winning the Global Race: The Competitiveness of the UK
as a Centre for International Banking, page 46.
7 See ,
last downloaded on 23 November 2016.
8 See http://taxandchancery_ut.decisions.tribunals.gov.
uk/Documents/decisions/Burns-v-FCA-penalty.pdf, last
downloaded on 23 November 2016.
9 See http://taxandchancery
Documents/decisions/John_Pottage_v_FSA_decision.pdf,
last downloaded on 23 November 2016.
10 See
attachment_data/file/558696/treasury_committee_response_
HBOS_PRINT.pdf, last downloaded on 23 November 2016.
forward. However, the belief that a separate
enforcement body would produce more cases
may be flawed. Whichever cases are ultimately
taken to enforcement, they must first be
referred to enforcement for consideration.
At the moment, that can be done relatively
easily. Such discussions with a separate
enforcement body would likely be more formal
in nature and may, as the PCBS feared, lead to
fewer rather than more cases being referred.
Rights of the individual
A separate enforcement body would not
necessarily generate more enforcement
actions, but such a separation might be
justified to safeguard the interests of
individuals. Although, as noted, the regulator
has not lost many cases in the Tribunal,
those it has lost tend to concern individuals,
and, of course, the increasing attention
to personal liability means that there will
probably be many more such cases in the
future, facilitated by the new senior manager
regimes. It is important for any regulatory
disciplinary process to operate fairly, in the
interests of both society and the individual.
A separate enforcement body would be more
likely to take an arm’s-length approach to
discipline. Inevitably, such a body would not
be perfect and referrals to the Tribunal would
be expected to continue. However, on balance,
the benefits of safeguarding individual
rights seem to outweigh the efficiency that
regulators enjoy in the regime as it operates
at the moment.
HMT’s response
On 10 October 2016, HMT responded to the
TSC’s HBOS recommendations.10 It said the
creation of a separate enforcement body was
not merited. It said “There is a significant
need for cooperation and coordination
between supervisory and enforcement
functions that are best served by combining
these features in one organisation”.
The TSC will doubtless respond further
in due course.
Ashley Kovas
Senior Regulatory Intelligence Expert
Thomson Reuters