8th June 2012

IFA Letter: The Treasury Select Committee recommendations on accountability of FCA

THE FSA – A CONSTITUTIONAL ABUSE?

Government’s response to Treasury select committee report on the Financial Services Bill was “largely unsympathetic” to their recommendations. The Treasury select committee says its recommendations on accountability of the Financial Conduct Authority “require statutory force” in a report published today (8 June).

WHY?

The FSA is not accountable to Treasury Ministers or to Parliament, as confirmed by Hector Sants at a Treasury Select Committee meeting on 9 March 2011. As a parliamentarian can you really accept the delegation of your elected democratic powers? The Treasury select committee has made recommendations on accountability of the Financial Conduct Authority that “require statutory force” in a report published today (8 June), and your support is required.

In contemporary usage, dictatorship refers to an autocratic form of absolute rule by leadership unrestricted by law, constitutions, or other social and political factors within the state. It suits whatever government to allow regulation by dictatorship i.e. unrestricted by law, constitutions, or other social and political factors within the state.

I suspect that we have all been duped over many years into the false belief that we lived in a democracy subjected to the rule of law, where no man/woman or body is above the law. The FSA is an unelected, unaccountable body of the executive. In constitutional law the executiveis the part of government but separate with responsibility for the administration of the state, in our case the regulation of the state and its financial services.

The government claims the FSA is independent because they have an eye to preserving the myth of the “separation of powers”, a constitutional issue because if the government and executive are one and the same you risk dictatorships where the different powers of government are assumed by one body i.e. no separation of powers. The FSA and the government must be the same because the FSA is not answerable to government and the only way that could be tolerated is by virtue of the fact that the FSA is actually the government speaking.  That must be the only explanation to the FSA’s lack of accountability. 

Thus the separation of powers does not exist as authority is granted to the FSA at risk of our rights. You see the executive FSA is not supposed to make laws (the role of the legislature) or interpret them (the role of the judiciary). The role of the executive is to enforce the law as written by the legislature and for its actions to be adjudicated upon by the judicial system. We all know this is not the case in financial services. The FSA is therefore an abuse of power in a democratic system and as such a danger to us all.

Hector Sants snubbed the TSC on the 9^th of  March 2011 and now it’s time for you as an elected MP to reclaim your powers and make our future regulator accountable to parliament. 

SIMON MANSELL

IFA Temple Bar Independent Financial Advice Ltd

FSA/FCA