Will the Financial Regulator be more robust post Neary?

[Brendan Burgess]

The Financial Regulator has always been very slow to call banks to account. They were very legalistic and unless they had a watertight legal case, they did not challenge wrongdoing or wrongdoers. For example, they concluded that what Sean Fitzpatrick did was "not illegal" and so they took no action.

By contrast, the Financial Services Ombudsman has taken or defended what he has considered good cases. He has lost some of these cases but no one can describe him as being afraid of the financial services industry.

I wonder will the FR now see that not taking action has a potentially huge downside which will have to be balanced against the risk of losing face if their decisions are challenged successfully in the courts?

 

[z109]

It depends on who gets the job. As I see it, the laws and the organisation are in place to allow a strict financial regulator if the desire is for someone who doesn't espouse a light-touch approach. The reappointment of Mr. Hurley as governor of the Central Bank doesn't fill me with confidence, though. My guess is that another safe pair of hands will be sought as a circuit breaker (so they can take the flak rather than the minister in the event of anything going wrong). That is, after all, one of the purposes these institutions serve.

 

[z109]

PS any idea what sort of person (in background terms) might be in the frame?

 

[Brendan Burgess]

I heard people on the news tonight calling for tougher laws. All they need is to implement what is there.

They need to break the Central Bank culture with an outsider. I suspect that they will do that.

Brendan

 

[Spondulicks]

No, unless the Government gives the political direction to the Authority and one really does not see any sign of that.

The financial instutions and their directors no doubt are entwined with the political elite and operate behind close doors.

Only transparency regarding these interactions will change the situation.