Ethics and governance in the European Financial centers

A couple of weeks ago in an article I underlined a telling censorship on the depositary issue in the Alfi News Digest that was published on 13 July 2009 for July 2009.

 

The Alfi News Digest for July-August 2009 was published on 28 July 2009

 

There is a very good summary of the consultation on the depositary issue:

 

EC : public consultation on the UCITS depositary function

Against the background of recent discussions on the legislative framework for UCITS depositaries, the European Commission has launched a wide-ranging public consultation in terms of depositary’s duties, responsibility regime, organisational requirements, eligible criteria and supervision. The consultation also covers issues which are not directly linked with depositaries duties but which are particularly relevant for ensuring an increased level of investor protection within the UCITS framework (for example valuation).

The consultation is available at: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/investment/depositary_en.htm

The deadline for responses to this consultation paper is 15 September 2009.

Responses should be addressed to: market-depositary-consultation@ec.europa.eu

 

Maybe the ALFI contribution to this public consultation will be prepared by Rafik Fischer, currently member of the Board.

 

He is responsible for the depositary bank issues among ALFI’s vital issues.

 

He is the one who admitted the influence of the ALFI on the regulator in 2005 "The Luxembourg Investment Fund Industry has regularly had a very close and direct say on the evolution of the Luxembourg prudential regulatory environment governing the collective Investment Industry. (...) This influence has been exerted directly and indirectly by the lobbying initiatives taken on the level of the different professional associations, be it ALFI or ABBL, but also and more importantly, trough a direct association with the Luxembourg Supervisory Authorities by means of a number of standing committees”

 

He can be found for many years on the board of Directors of the CSSF, in the Prudential regulation consultative committee, in the Pension funds committee, in the Undertakings for collective investment committee, where he regularly had a very close and direct say on the evolution of the Luxembourg prudential regulatory in the name of the ALFI.

See for example Annual Report 2008.

 

Such influence on the regulator in not acceptable.

Unless one finds it normal that

- Audited should have a very close and direct say on their auditor’s methods and duties

- Tax payers should have a very close and direct say on the tax administration’s methods and duties

- Students should have a very close and direct say on their professor’s methods and duties

- Subordinates should have a very close and direct say on their management’s methods and duties

- etc