Search results

Following the United Kingdom's (UK) withdrawal from the European Union (EU), there is uncertainty in the financial services industry on equivalence of regulatory regimes. This also affects the insurance industry. As of now, it is not clear if the UK’s supervisory regime (“Solvency UK”) will be classified as equivalent to the European Solvency II supervisory regime. After no equivalence decision was taken during the Brexit transition period and there are efforts by the UK in the form of the UK Solvency II Review and the Financial Services and Markets Bill to adapt Solvency II more to the characteristics of the national insurance market, the uncertainties are intensified. Although Solvency II non-equivalence would have a significant impact on insurance groups operating in both the UK and the EU, there has been no detailed analysis of whether these initiatives could have an impact on a future Solvency II equivalence decision. The purpose of this paper is to address and close this research gap with a literature review and a subsequent equivalence mapping and discussion.

Based on the literature review methodology, this paper draws on academic sources as well as publications from governments and regulators, articles from consultancies and subject matter experts and uses this literature to provide an overview of the current state of research on equivalence in the wider financial services industry, but specifically on Solvency II equivalence, the UK Solvency II Review and the Financial Services and Markets Bill. Based on this literature review, the paper also forms the basis for an innovative and forward-looking Solvency II equivalence mapping and discussion.

Several articles state that differences between Solvency II and Solvency UK could harm a future Solvency II equivalence decision. The UK Solvency II Review and the Financial Services and Markets Bill are two initiatives that support the objective of aligning the Solvency II supervisory regime more closely with the circumstances of the UK insurance market. Although both initiatives contribute to the fact that Solvency UK differs in parts from Solvency II, based on the literature review and the subsequent equivalence mapping and discussion, there are currently no reforms that should harm future Solvency II equivalence decisions.

This paper provides a previously non-existent overview of equivalence in the wider financial services industry, but specifically on Solvency II equivalence, the UK Solvency II Review and the Financial Services and Markets Bill, and brings them together in an innovative equivalence discussion. It thus presents the current state of knowledge on Solvency II after Brexit and develops it further around a mapping against the equivalence criteria. As non-equivalence could have significant implications for insurance groups operating in both the UK and the EU, this paper is a useful and practical study that provides a previously non-existent equivalence mapping and discussion based on current initiatives and publications. It thus closes the research gap identified and reduces uncertainties in the insurance industry and can be used as a blueprint for detailed and forward-looking equivalence mappings and discussions for the wider financial services industry.

Purpose – The global financial crisis of 2007–2009 has highlighted the need for reform of financial regulation in several jurisdictions across the globe, including the United Kingdom and the United States. This chapter argues that the reforms need to be comprehensive and will therefore have to cover several aspects of financial regulation.

Design/methodology/approach – The chapter critically examines some of the areas where reforms are most needed. This involves consideration of the merits and demerits of multi-functional or universal banking. It also involves consideration of the systemic and other problems that arise as a result of the increasingly international nature of banking and other financial services. Moreover, it examines the need for regulators to understand and keep pace with financial innovation. Furthermore, it involves discussion on the need to improve corporate governance and remuneration policies in banks and other financial services providers as well as the need for adequate arrangements for dealing with bank insolvencies and collapses.

Findings – Market fundamentalism and over-reliance on the alleged self-correcting powers of the market have led to excessive deregulation and liberalisation in world financial markets. Financial regulatory reforms will therefore have to be substantial and comprehensive to properly address the problems caused by excessive financial liberalisation.

Originality/value – The chapter examines significant issues that academics, regulators and policy makers should consider when devising or implementing reforms designed to prevent, or reduce the impact of, financial crises in the future.

With the UK Conservative-Liberal Democrat Government reaching its mid-term point, this paper examines its austerity measures and public expenditure reductions in family support and children's services, and its revisions of family support, family intervention, child poverty, child well-being and children's services reform policies in contrast to the former Labour governments.

The paper is informed by policy analysis and research reviews.

The analysis focuses on three dimensions of policy change: first, reductions in income support for children and families and central government funding for children's services; second, refocusing child poverty, child well-being and family policies around the Conservative's “Broken Britain” campaign and the Liberal Democrats targeted social mobility initiatives; and finally, broader children's services reforms. The paper recognises some progressive developments but charts the social welfare implications of reduced welfare entitlements for families and the pressures on support services for families from children's services reforms.

The paper combines reflections on the aims, achievements and limitations of Labour reforms to family support and children's services with a broader analysis of welfare state retrenchment and restructuring under the Coalition. It places current changes in family support and children's services within the context of the ideological influences on the Coalition's social policies and the primacy of its austerity programme and welfare state reform agendas.

In the context of increasing private provision of social security and welfare, alongside what is argued to be the ‘financialisation’ of daily lives, individuals in many countries face an array of potentially difficult financial choices and decisions. Limitations in levels of knowledge and expertise may lead them to consider seeking financial advice. Yet, in the wake of the great financial crisis, trust in the financial services industry is low.

At the same time, in a number of countries the financial advice sector is facing its own challenges. These include regulatory issues concerning the definition, suitability and delivery of advice; the affordability of advice; and the challenges and opportunities facing the advice sector as a result of the increasing use of technology in the financial services sector.

This chapter examines the implications of these developments for the regulation and governance of financial advice in the context of Markets in Financial Instruments Directive II. In particular, it considers the example of the UK and issues this raises for the implementation of recent European regulatory reforms.

The spectacular performance of the US financial market in recent years, the financial crises in South‐East Asia and Russia and the collapse of one of the most established merchant banks in the world are landmark events in economic history that have prompted concerns around the globe. The advent of the information age and globalisation means that the consequences of these events are felt more readily and extensively than ever before. Sustainability of financial growth and avoidance of future crises raise questions with a common denominator — good governance. With one of the principal financial centres in the world, it is trite to suggest that the need for good governance in the UK cannot be overstated. Protecting investors against abusive and fraudulent practices in the financial services industry has always assumed great importance. Since its emergence as an international financial and trading centre in the 13th century, the City of London has consistently emphasised the values of market confidence and integrity. In the Financial Services and Markets Bill, which is currently being read in Parliament, it is stated that its object is to maintain confidence in the financial markets, to promote public awareness and understanding, to secure an appropriate degree of protection for consumers through recognising the different degree of risks involved in different transactions and the different degrees of expertise and experience of different consumers, and to reduce the extent to which financial undertakings are used for the furtherance of financial crime.

Good governance is often regarded as essential for a country's economic development. The World Bank's governance framework has guided development projects and governance reform in many developing nations over the past few decades. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the World Bank's approach towards governance reform in the public sector, especially in developing economies of the world.

The paper highlights various aspects of good governance that are relevant to the delivery of social and infrastructural services in developing countries. The paper also discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the World Bank's governance framework, especially pertaining to social and infrastructure sectors in developing economies.

In light of its past experience, the World Bank has expanded the reach of its developmental activities to incorporate governance reform in accordance with the institutional realities prevailing in a developing economy, instead of following a “one‐size‐fit‐all” approach to public sector governance reform. The bank has also encouraged the use of decentralized decision making and private sector participation to achieve greater efficiency, transparency and accountability in the delivery of social and infrastructural services.

The paper provides a useful contribution to the literature concerning the role of international development organizations in formulating strategies that developing economies can follow to pursue public sector governance reform.

‘It must be remembered there is nothing more difficult to plan, more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to manage than the creation of a new system. For the initiator has the enmity of all who will profit by the preservation of the old institutions and merely lukewarm defenders in those who would gain by the new one.’ Machiavelli.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the political influence on the reforms proffered for the banking sector.

The paper is divided into three main parts. First, the paper will examine the background of the financial crisis. The second and main part of the paper is the examination and critique of the White Paper reform proposals. The paper concludes by critically examining the opposition party's reform paper and contrasts the proposals.

The paper concludes that although the bank regulation needs to be reformed, it is debateable whether it is the time or the place or indeed the party that is right to achieve a successful result at the present time.

The implications for the research is that during the next year banking reforms will undergo further changes, therefore, there will be a requirement to revisit and revise the findings in light of the political agenda of the new government.

This paper offers an original insight into the political influences on banking regulation within the UK.