FSA forks out £638,500 for hospitality at Canary Wharf

How can funding the FSA entirely by the COMPANIES that it regulates result in fair and just treatment for the CUSTOMERS of the financial institutions?

Does anyone, maybe someone from the FSA or even a politician, have a credible answer?

how can they justify that amount of money!!!!! when the likes of thousands of keydata investors may have lost their money and all because the fsa did not notify financial institutes that they had concerns about keydata as far back as 2005

I think it is disgusting

This is the problem that arises when you have a regulator that does not have to account to a higher authority--they do what the hell they like and damn the cost.

If the FSA survives with the new government they must me made accountable to either the Bank of England or to the Public Accounts Committee in the House of Commons and have to accept that their profligacy will cost them their jobs if it continues.

A cap must also be put on their budget so that it doesn't become an even more onerous burden on the companies that it supposedly regulates.

Hi their all,

Fegus, I do not know if you are aware that with the Aviva reatribution scam, I say scam because it wa a rip off. The case was brought before the Treasury select Committe (TSC), hearing, and both Aviva and the FSA were told in no uncertain terms, that they are failing in their duty of care to consumers, and the FSA was specifically told and asked why they were not carrying out the function they where their dio and that is to regulate. But as you rightly point out, how can the FSA be stern and make these conglomerates conform, when they are being funded by these same companies. They will never cut off the hand that feeds them. So in my personal opinion the FSA is cewtainly not fit for purpose, and moreover they should be disbanded, they are a complete failure to consumers. It wouls appear that Aviva and the FSA totally ignored the TSC

As a youngster I was asked by my Careers Adviser what my ideal job would be. Typically, at that immature time of my life I was uncertain, but now I am quite clear. It is Finance Director of the FSA. Towards the end of each financial year I would simply have to gather the wish lists from all the various departments within the FSA, (now it seems to include the catering corps), add on a 10-15% contingency in case anyone forgot anything, then distribute demands to all the companies, firms and practitioners within the regulation of the FSA to stump up the cash. I could then sit back, collect the cash and hibernate until one of my colleagues within the FSA runs out of cash, at which time I could raise an 'interim levy' on the poor unsuspecting firms trying to earn an honest living.

King John didn't get away with it when Robin Hood was around - do we have any men in green tights in the vicinity of Canary Wharf?

Fergus and Ronald

A real strong minded professional person with principles would not allow his funders to influence his decisions. Also, if this person was made aware that if he was influenced he would be dismissed instantly - without any type of compensation whatsoever.

These conditions must be in the Conditions of Contract of Hector Sants.

Mr Sants should be sacked if found guilty

"They will never cut off the hand that feeds them. " - does this not apply in equal measure to financial advisors on commission?

Why should the FSA have paid for tax advice for its international staff ? And were these consultants or full time staff? Doesn't the HR department do that sort of thing from its own overheads? If they were 'international', were they given advice to enable them to pay less tax or to become essentially tax-free?

Surely they should have been responsible for meeting the costs of sorting out their own tax affairs themselves? How many such staff were there and how much did the FSA pay? Did they also have their accounts done and their tax forms completed at the expense of those paying the FSAs fees? I am fairly sure that giving advice to reduce their tax liabilities and possibly help with completion of their accounts/tax assessments would be a criminally fraudulent action since the fees paid to the FSA are not given for any such purpose.

Could someone ask for this information under another FOI request? Alternatively, could someone's MP be asked to seek the information through a parliamentary question? After all Lord Turner can hardly tell the house to get lost if asked can he?

£638,000 here £1,000,000 there ....it doesn't take much imagination to work out how we have arrived at this point .

Time to stop the gravy train i think folks .

Thank you Ronald and Anonymous2 for the courtesy of an answer.

I await the same courtesy of either the FSA or a politician.

It seems fairly obvious that the present system was created with the intention of allowing a little nest feathering without the complication of accountability.

For certain people in this country accountability does not exist.

No surprise anymore

- The FSA is unanswerable to anyone.

- Expect accountability form everyone they regulate but not for their own mistakes

- Cannot be challenged in a court of law as they are protected by statute and even Government would find it hard to bring them to task now their powers have increased.

Expect more of the same with greater costs and onerous requirements as their power increases.

Looks like they'll be able to find a few places to make some cuts then in these time of austerity!

I would like to see a new rule that no government funded employee is allowed to earn more than the prime minister.