Memorandum by the Institutional Fund Managers'
We urge that the Joint Committee be reconvened,
not later than September this year, to hear further representations
on the revised Bill and further FSA consultation papers.
A mechanism should be put in place whereby the
FSA can be challenged about their proposed allocation of costs
and consideration should be given to the principles for allocation
being enshrined in primary legislation.
The Government should be prepared to pay for
costs incurred in the educational programme for meeting the objective
of public awareness.
(a) European Convention on Human Rights
It is important for the credibility of FSA
that the enforcement regime should not fall foul of ECHR the first
time a decision of the FSA is challenged in Court. Accordingly,
the Government must be asked to demonstrate (not simply aver)
that the proposed regime will meet the requirement of ECHR.
(b) Role of the Enforcement Committee
We strongly believe that there should be
practitioners and public interest representatives on the Committee
and that such representatives should be able to vote to ensure
the independence of the Committee. Consideration should be given
to the Chairman and Secretary of the Committee being appointed
by the Lord Chancellor or some other external party.
(c) Award of Costs Against Individuals and
The Bill should be amended so that individuals
may not have costs awarded against them (save in egregious cases)
or a limit (say £5,000) should be placed on the amount of
costs that can be recovered.
We also strongly recommend that costs should
be recoverable against the FSA if an individual (or firm) is successful
at the Appeal Tribunal.
FSA: NO ACTION
We believe the FSA should be obliged to provide
in a timely manner interpretative guidance applying to a particular
factual situation and to provide guidance on its rules which is
disseminated to authorised persons in a timely manner.
31 March 1999