The Money Debate supports the call by Lord McFall to require the regulator to ‘have regard’ – as the legal term goes – to the public’s access to advice in the financial services bill. That would change the context of a lot of retail financial services regulation. It would require the FSA to encourage access in reality not just to outline theoretical access as it did with simplified advice. It would also put more pressure on MAS and there’s nothing wrong with that. It might also encourage the FSA and FCA to relieve some pressure on IFAs. Shame it won’t be included.
If you haven’t seen this week’s columns from elsewhere, on FundsNetwork I suggests several ways in which MAS got into this mess. One important overlooked issue was the cynical decision to ditch the word guidance and replace it with advice. Establishing the boundary with regulated advice is going to get even more important if it starts recommending firmer courses of action.
My column in FtAdviser.com suggested many fund managers are communicating the crisis to investment advisers and clients well. Do you agree? Here is this week’s trade news round up on Adviser Home – a news review not a snooze review. Next week the Money Debate will consider ways in which we can save the City of London from itself. Answers on a post card – a big post card.
