Lords summon FCA chief over controversial ‘name and shame’ plans
A group of peers has launched another stinging attack on the boss of the Financial Conduct Authority and summoned him to appear in front of a committee after the regulator “failed” to address concerns over its controversial ‘name and shame plans.
A row has engulfed the City in recent weeks after the FCA revealed plans to publicly name the firms it is investigating in a bid to deter firms from wrongdoing.
However, the measures have triggered a backlash from both financial services firms and Westminster, with Chancellor Jeremy Hunt launching an extraordinary call for the regulator to “re-look” at the plans earlier this week.
Both government and top City groups have voiced concerns that the plans could hammer the UK’s appeal as a place to do business and contradict the FCA’s secondary objective to boost the “growth and competitiveness” of the UK.
After the Lords Financial Services Regulation Committee wrote to Rathi last month calling on him to halt the plans, the group has issued another statement today said was “disappointed” by the regulator’s lack of engagement.
“The FCA response failed to directly address our concerns and did not commit to pausing implementation until after our committee had properly scrutinised its proposal,” Lord Forsyth of Drumlean, chair of the Financial Services Regulation Committee, said. “This isn’t acceptable.”
Rathi has now been summoned him to appear before a committee after considering the City’s response to a consultation on the plans, which closed on Tuesday
The FCA has doubled down on the plans and says they will help beef up its enforcement action and deter companies from wrongdoing.
Writing in Morning Wire on Monday, the watchdog’s enforcement chiefs said: “We are also not seeking to shame firms.
“It’s about shining a spotlight on a case in a way that will deter others, raise standards, reassure consumers, counter ill-founded speculation that is damaging to firms or a sector, or encourage people to come forward with evidence and intelligence.”