Philip Robinson, Financial Crime & Intelligence Division Director at the FSA, did a speech last 3 September.
He stated that "Where there’s evidence of fraud and dishonesty, regulators, professional bodies and law enforcement all have differing combinations of powers to take against offenders. And government agencies and trade bodies all have interests in the housing market being clean and efficient."
The FSA communicates any time there is an issue, which is a good thing and its fines are dissuasive enough.
The UK's decision not to pursue an investigation into arms sales to Saudi Arabia is a black mark against economic transparency and judicial freedom in the country, according to Kathrin Betz from ISN Security Watch in an article titled "Britain yields to bribery and corruption".
This case was raised by Transparency International.
She observed that since 1998, the UK has been party to the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention, a binding multilateral treaty to fight corruption. The July ruling to halt an investigation into alleged corruption for reasons of public safety shows that the UK failed to fully incorporate the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention into domestic law. Read in context with recent legislative developments, this raises doubts about the UK's efficiency in fighting corruption and raises questions as to what extent national security considerations should be taken into account during corruption investigations.
And she concludes that with every new fact that comes to light in the BAE-Saudi case, the allegations will continue and the UK will have missed its chance to take a strong stance against corruption. It will also become entangled in its own anti-corruption hypocrisy.
The financial Times has reported that the anti-bribery working group of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development attacked London’s performance in a letter delivered to the government in June.