A petition has been posted on the Government’s E-Petition website calling the Treasury to force the FSA to delay the implementation of the RDR by a year.
A petition has been posted on the Government’s E-Petition website calling the Treasury to force the FSA to delay the implementation of the Retail Distribution Review by a year.
This follows events in July, when the Treasury Select Committee first published a report calling for the RDR to be delayed by 12 months. The committee reasoned this would give advisers more time to meet the qualification requirements, and soften the cliff-edge deadline for more experienced advisers.
Before this report reached publication, the FSA pre-empted it, jumped in and rejected the delay, stating that it was standing by the original deadline of January 1st 2013. Treasury Select Committee members were shocked by the move, saying that the response displayed the arrogance of the regulator and its contempt for the Committee’s work.
At a Committee meeting in November, Chief Executive Hector Sants apologised on behalf of the FSA, saying he was ‘extremely sorry’ the pre-emptive rejection had given this impression. He excused it as an attempt to stifle media speculation around the delay, and went on to say that the FSA was at no point considering the delay.
The new E-Petition calls for the Treasury to force the FSA to take on board its recommendation for a delay. However, the petition requires at least 100,000 signatures in order to be considered for parliamentary debate and have a chance of being acted upon. So far it has gained just 235 signatures.
The petition states: “This serious and considered report was dismissed offhand by the FSA, showing arrogance and contempt for Parliamentary procedure and authority. This petition calls for the Government to force the FSA to reconsider its position on the RDR, to delay implementing the initiative accordingly, and more broadly, to force it to pay due regard to Parliamentary scrutiny of its work.”
It goes on to highlight the TSC’s concern that the Review could lead to a reduction in the availability of advice.