Reinforcing the responsibilities of financial regulators: Are we still barking up the wrong tree?

John Ashton

Reinforcing the responsibilities of financial regulators: Are we still barking up the wrong tree?

Management

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter

Abstract

In this short essay we explore the regulatory criticisms raised within the “Changing Banking for Good” report (House of Commons, House of Lords 2013). These criticisms suggested UK financial regulators have been risk averse, loath to enforce regulation and often intervene in markets after a considerable delays and problems have growth in their magnitude and costs. The practice of regulation was also criticised as requiring excessive and overly complex rules fostering a culture of box ticking. Perhaps most tellingly a compact between government and the banking sector was reported through which regulators moderate their actions to ensure financial stability. The “Changing Banking for Good” report also proposed multiple remedies. These included harsher punishments, more enforcement activity, and multiple initiatives to ensure individuals accept responsibility for their decisions. Many of these proposals have now been translated into financial regulation, often altering how regulation is undertaken.

Original language	English
Title of host publication	PCBS “Changing Banking for Good" Initiative
Subtitle of host publication	A Ten-Year Retrospective
Place of Publication	Edinburgh
Publisher	Chartered Bankers Institute
Publication status	Published - 30 Jun 2023

Bibliographical note

This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details

Access to Document

J Ashton. Reinforcing the responsibilities of the regulators
This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details
Accepted author manuscript, 29.7 KB

Cite this

@inbook{969be6210e10410f88f7a0a8754da7fc,

title = "Reinforcing the responsibilities of financial regulators: Are we still barking up the wrong tree? ",

abstract = "In this short essay we explore the regulatory criticisms raised within the “Changing Banking for Good” report (House of Commons, House of Lords 2013). These criticisms suggested UK financial regulators have been risk averse, loath to enforce regulation and often intervene in markets after a considerable delays and problems have growth in their magnitude and costs. The practice of regulation was also criticised as requiring excessive and overly complex rules fostering a culture of box ticking. Perhaps most tellingly a compact between government and the banking sector was reported through which regulators moderate their actions to ensure financial stability. The “Changing Banking for Good” report also proposed multiple remedies. These included harsher punishments, more enforcement activity, and multiple initiatives to ensure individuals accept responsibility for their decisions. Many of these proposals have now been translated into financial regulation, often altering how regulation is undertaken. ",

author = "John Ashton",

note = "This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher{\textquoteright}s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details ",

year = "2023",

month = jun,

day = "30",

language = "English",

booktitle = "PCBS “Changing Banking for Good{"} Initiative",

publisher = "Chartered Bankers Institute ",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Reinforcing the responsibilities of financial regulators

T2 - Are we still barking up the wrong tree?

AU - Ashton, John

N1 - This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details

PY - 2023/6/30

Y1 - 2023/6/30

N2 - In this short essay we explore the regulatory criticisms raised within the “Changing Banking for Good” report (House of Commons, House of Lords 2013). These criticisms suggested UK financial regulators have been risk averse, loath to enforce regulation and often intervene in markets after a considerable delays and problems have growth in their magnitude and costs. The practice of regulation was also criticised as requiring excessive and overly complex rules fostering a culture of box ticking. Perhaps most tellingly a compact between government and the banking sector was reported through which regulators moderate their actions to ensure financial stability. The “Changing Banking for Good” report also proposed multiple remedies. These included harsher punishments, more enforcement activity, and multiple initiatives to ensure individuals accept responsibility for their decisions. Many of these proposals have now been translated into financial regulation, often altering how regulation is undertaken.

AB - In this short essay we explore the regulatory criticisms raised within the “Changing Banking for Good” report (House of Commons, House of Lords 2013). These criticisms suggested UK financial regulators have been risk averse, loath to enforce regulation and often intervene in markets after a considerable delays and problems have growth in their magnitude and costs. The practice of regulation was also criticised as requiring excessive and overly complex rules fostering a culture of box ticking. Perhaps most tellingly a compact between government and the banking sector was reported through which regulators moderate their actions to ensure financial stability. The “Changing Banking for Good” report also proposed multiple remedies. These included harsher punishments, more enforcement activity, and multiple initiatives to ensure individuals accept responsibility for their decisions. Many of these proposals have now been translated into financial regulation, often altering how regulation is undertaken.

M3 - Chapter

BT - PCBS “Changing Banking for Good" Initiative

PB - Chartered Bankers Institute

CY - Edinburgh

ER -