By Steve Conley, Founder of the Academy of Life Planning
Integrity is more than a word etched into the FCA’s code of conduct—it is the cornerstone of trust in the financial system. Yet, recent FCA court cases, set against the backdrop of a government-mandated growth agenda, raise a troubling question: Is the FCA’s leadership still anchored in integrity—or has it been swept away by the tides of political and corporate influence?
The regulator’s own principles are clear: act with integrity. But in practice, the line between consumer protection and commercial facilitation has blurred. The FCA’s increasingly aggressive stance in court—evident in the Markou case, where it publicly challenged a Tribunal decision as “irrational”—suggests a shift from independent oversight to institutional self-preservation.
Meanwhile, cases such as Seiler, Whitestone & Raitzin reveal deeper systemic issues: weak corporate controls, insufficient guidance in high-risk jurisdictions, and an overreliance on post hoc enforcement. These aren’t just technical failures—they’re symptoms of a regulatory culture losing its ethical compass.
At the heart of this is a broader problem: the subordination of the FCA’s primary objective—consumer protection—to its secondary aim—supporting the government’s economic growth agenda.
This is not speculation. As Levelling the Playing Field, a report by Spotlight on Corruption, reveals:
- 86.5% of Treasury meetings are with business interests,
- Just 2.3% with consumer groups,
- And post-election, that figure dropped to a shocking 1.5%.
This capture of economic policymaking by corporate stakeholders is now spilling into regulatory conduct. The result? An enforcement regime that punishes individuals inconsistently, protects institutions strategically, and increasingly aligns with the ambitions of the City rather than the needs of the public.
So what does acting with integrity mean when the system itself is skewed?
It must mean more than prosecuting small firms or lone directors while high-level banking executives—still under tribunal review—remain shielded from full accountability.
It must mean resisting political pressure to deregulate under the guise of economic growth and reasserting the FCA’s primary mandate: to protect consumers, ensure fair outcomes, and uphold public trust.
A Path Forward: From Capture to Courage
To reclaim integrity at the regulatory level, we must:
- Rebalance FCA priorities by restoring consumer protection as the clear and unquestionable driver of decision-making.
- Demand transparency in lobbying, secondments, and policymaking within both the Treasury and the regulator.
- Equip the public with regulatory literacy—using the FCA’s own Consumer Duty and Prudential Standards as tools for accountability.
- Call for parliamentary oversight of how regulatory objectives are being interpreted and enforced.
Final Word
Integrity, by definition, requires a moral stance—even when inconvenient. If the FCA’s leadership continues to place market growth above consumer safety, then it not only fails in its mission—it risks becoming complicit in the very misconduct it was designed to prevent.
Now is the time for the FCA to prove that integrity is more than a principle. It’s a practice. And the public is watching.
Your Money or Your Life
Unmask the highway robbers – Enjoy wealth in every area of your life!
By Steve Conley. Available on Amazon. Visit www.steve.conley.co.uk to find out more.
Academy of Life Planning 