Where am I? 
Home Better Business Regulation RDR
Categories: RDR
Topics: Mark Garnier| | Hector Sants| Lord Turner| Adair Turner| FSA
The FSA’s top brass is primed for a final face-off with the Treasury Select Committee (TSC) on the RDR next week, and advisers want MPs to hit the regulator with its fiercest interrogation yet.
Committee member Mark Garnier MP has promised to give Hector Sants and Sheila Nicoll 'hell' when they face questions from MPs on Wednesday afternoon.
Originally, parliamentary sources said FSA chairman Lord Adair-Turner would be appearing but this has now changed to director of conduct policy Nicoll.
The news top FSA officials are to face the TSC has sparked a fresh wave of support from advisers who feel "steam- rolled" by the regulator over RDR.
Ken Durkin, director of Independent Financial Choices, says he believes the interventions of Garnier and other MPs could help to bring about changes.
He says: "We can accept the qualifications but if they're going to insist on such tight constraints then we should be given a little more time.
"To remove commission is to remove an option clients want to have so it is destroying independent financial advice for most of the country."
However, Harry Katz, principal of Norwest Consultants, says he thinks the MPs have not focused enough on the issue of independence and is convinced the FSA will come out on top on Tuesday.
He says: "This is going to be like Muhammed Ali fighting Sonny Liston. Liston was a bruiser but Ali rang rings around him.
"I've got a feeling Garnier is not going to get away with what he thinks he'll get away with. Don't forget, the hierarchy have said ‘Enough's enough about this RDR. Stop looking at it'. So I don't see it being derailed."
He says he wants MPs to ask the FSA if it has thought clearly about the definition of independent advice.
"Well overdue": Our round-up of advisers' reactions
Michael Bates
"This is well overdue. Thank God for Mark Garnier. The future of the RDR should be governed by those who know what's best for the consumer - that's the consumer himself - and hey, at law that's the IFA.
"Sants and Nicoll have never given IFAs this credibility. They have duly scorned the law. Don't forget Mark - NO exams for experienced, blemish-free IFAs."
Keith Jayne
"I wish Mark Garnier the best of luck, because whilst I think I know what the outcome will be, anything which gives people the chance to see how the FSA have mis-managed the RDR issue and basically bullied IFAs over the years is very welcome.
"I support the principles of RDR and am at the required level, but what I strongly object to is the way in which has been implemented and I fail to see how a regulator who is so short of competency can portray and inflict such an unjustified level of arrogance."
Mike Jeacock
"Sants and Nicoll deserve to be grilled and exposed so everyone can see that they are not fit to hold the positions of power they have built for themselves. They do not listen to us and try to impose power without being answerable to Parliament."
Mark Simpson
"It now feels that we are finally getting the right support that we require. Thanks Mark and Harriett for backing our corner.
"It is about time that Sants and Nicoll be questioned about their actions instead of letting them steam-roll ahead thinking they are above everyone and everything around them."
| Share | |
| Comment | IFAs fear Ali-Liston repeat in FSA v TSC face-off |
More rdr news
Email alerts
Recommended reading
Categories
Topics
Comments
I'm with Harry on this one
Unless the MPs have been properly primed e.g. showing UK research revealed no detriment from commission, while seven year old Australian research was used to justify conversion to fees, Junior and his sidekick will get off lightly. It should be entertaining at least to see how good Junior actually is and why he merits the deputy position at the BoE. But don't expect any favours to fall our way lads.
Posted by: Green Eyed Monster
FSA V TSC face off
I'm usually an optomistic but as the FSA have statutory authority meaning they are above the law and courts. They don't really care what is fair, they don't want to lose face and admit they are wrong in every way and they areintent on finishing off our industry. So I think they will steam-roller over the TSC very eaisly. But I am praying for a miracle.
Posted by: Jennifer Nicholls
Response to green-eyed monster
The insinuation in your last post that TSC members may not be properly briefed about things like the dodgy Australian stats is completely wide of the mark. Many of the submissions to the TSC (mine included) pointed things like that out, not to mention the fact that MP Harriett Baldwin slammed those stats publicly when Sants first trotted them out before Xmas. Tune in next Wednesday at 3.00pm. You will find that the TSC will do a far better job than you seem to expect
Posted by: Roger Heath
Well done Mark and Harriet
Aifa should be ashamed of themselves for their cowardice and acquiesence ever since the RDR was launched in 2006. Their failure to act in the interests of hundreds of their members is a disgrace. Hope they get slated by the TSC. It's what they deserve.
Posted by: Chris Birtles
Sorry Roger Heath ...I doubt it
Very good summation Roger, but I do think the whole 'investigation' is a done deal as Sir Humphrey has already been hard at work in the background/ FSA is an extension of the Civil Service and Sir Humphrey has been pulling strings to justify the huge costs in terms of money and manpower at Canary Wharf. True there will be much shouting and nashing of teeth but I doubt very much that anything will come of it. All a great shame that egos of Sants & Co get in the way of more honourable pursuits such as actually improving outcomes for customers ....but there again that would require genuine dialogue between FSA and IFAs ....but why would the FSA want to do something as simple and common sense as that !!
Posted by: Roger
FSA v TSC
I know it's all been said before, but it is totally unacceptable that advisers who are already at level 4 (in my case 15 years ago) with a squeaky clean record and thousands of CPD hours, now have to 'gap fill' simply to carry on trading. If a new entrant passes all his exams at 70%, will he have to 'gap fill' given he doesn't know 30%
Posted by: Bill Wells
Correction
I only felt that the FSA would 'come out on top' if Turner was in the ring. Now that he has prematurely thrown in the towel I have to say that puts a very different light on it. I really don't think Nicholl is Turner's equal when it comes to being a smooth operator and perhaps Garnier may now well win on points. It is very interesting though that Turner has chickened out - I think that speaks volumes.
Posted by: Harry Katz
iFA,s fear repeat in FSA v TSC face off
The response from the FSA will not be about the rights and wrongs of the RDR. It will be about them saving face. Don,t forget at one of their meetings they considered pulling RDR. This speaks for its self.
Posted by: terry
Related articles
Most Read
Audio / Visual
With the industry's biggest fund managers, IFAonline welcomes you to the media centre.
This year we have 14 awards designed to mark out the very best products in a highly competitive and innovative market. This includes three new awards for 2011 to reflect the developments in this rapidly growing market: Best Dual/Multi-Index Product, Best Structured (Oeic) Fund and Best Structured Product Provider.
Events
Poll
|
|
Job search
Ifaonlinejobs will open the right investment career path for you. Search hundreds of vacancies on www.ifaonlinejobs.co.uk now
In Focus
Two months left before the ‘real RDR deadline’ – are you compliant with the required professional...
Viewpoints
2012 marks a watershed for the Life companies, fund managers, banks and advisers who service...
sponsored by
RDR
The RDR should be a good thing. Better qualified advisers benefits us all through improved public confidence. However, fee only advice is about VAT revenues, not client benefit. How does it benefit less wealthy clients to pay 20% more for their advice. Keep the exams, lose the VAT please. Good luck with this one as an overnight move to fees coupled with increased capital adequacy is really going to hurt many smaller firms.
Posted by: Alistair Paterson