Looking to Europe
Ask a British op risk executive about who his financial services regulator is, and he is most likely to point to the Financial Services Authority. Wrong.
Yes, the FSA enforces the rules. But increasingly it does not make them. It is the European Commission that does and they are then OKd by the European parliament and council. Indeed, the UK FSA’s Basel II framework is going to simply be a ‘copy-out’ of the final Capital Adequacy Directive (CAD) produced in Brussels. So, it is to Brussels that op risk managers should be turning their eyes.
Most folk don’t know much about the EU. In the UK, the June EU parlimentary elections saw a voter turnout of merely 38.2%. The national mood towards the EU waivers between tepid acceptance of the reality of the political situation and a desire to exit completely – as exemplified by the rise in the number of votes for the UK Independence Party, which advocates withdrawal. But op risk managers would be very wrong to dismiss Brussels’ impact.
So, while the CAD might be a slog to get through, op risk managers should read it, and make their views heard, either through their trade association, or MEP.
Op risk managers outside the EU should also study the CAD – it is crucial to understanding how the international playing field will shape up in years to come.
So, make fun of Eurocrats. But when it comes to Basel II, ignore them at your peril.
By Ellen Davis, Editor
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Esma supervision proposals ensnare Bloomberg and Tradeweb
Derivatives and bonds venues would become subject to centralised supervision
Industry frowns on FCA’s single-sided trade reporting efforts
Buy side warns UK attempt to ease Mifir burden may miss target; dealers aren’t happy either
One vision, two paths: UK reporting revamp diverges from EU
FCA and Esma could learn from each other on how to cut industry compliance costs
Market doesn’t share FSB concerns over basis trade
Industry warns tougher haircut regulation could restrict market capacity as debt issuance rises
FCMs warn of regulatory gaps in crypto clearing
CFTC request for comment uncovers concerns over customer protection and unchecked advertising
UK clearing houses face tougher capital regime than EU peers
Ice resists BoE plan to move second skin in the game higher up capital stack, but members approve
ECB seeks capital clarity on Spire repacks
Dealers split between counterparty credit risk and market risk frameworks for repack RWAs
FSB chief defends global non-bank regulation drive
Schindler slams ‘misconception’ that regulators intend to impose standardised bank-like rules