Friday, October 03, 2008

Question for Member of Parliament

One question investors may want to ask MPs is What is the point of a regulatory system that does not lead to investor compensation?"

MAS has said "However, investors should understand that while regulatory actions are important to deter breaches and uphold the integrity of the system, they do not lead to compensation for investors"

8 comments:

David said...

Question to MAS. Why so? Aren't the laws man-made? Is it because they want the financial institutions to do business as free as possible during the good times for economic growth but at the expense of the retail investors when there is a credit event? Just like inequality and to accept it as a fact of life?

Anonymous said...

They don't even regulate. It is a sham.It's purpose to thicken the statute books and for the insurance companies to decorate the walls to show its compliance and in the ceo's room for him to mock at and throw darts at.
If there has been regulation this won't happen. It is time chop some heads and hang them at the city hall to deter would be malpractitioners, product pushers and liars.

law and order

Anonymous said...

Last time everyone were so proud of mas. Even in PCCI case, which hit so many countries, spore was spared.
This time round, spore is worse hit. The situation is even worse than HK.
What a big difference in such a short timeframe.

Anonymous said...

mas

Last time: World class in protecting people's money.

Now: World class in risking people's money??

Anonymous said...

As a regulator, can't you "Advise" instead of "Ask"the FIs?
Please learn from world class org. like HKMA.

Tiang said...

Is MAS saying that they can only regulate for the future even if wrongdoing is found to have been committed by the FIs or that they have already concluded there has been no wrongdoing by the FIs?

If regulators found as a fact that the FIs were fraudulently / negligently hiding important facts from investors, then surely as regulators they can do more than prevent future ocurrences? For insurance products, the regulators had put pressure on insurance companies to return the losses incurred by policyholders where misrepresentation was found. Why not for minibond holders? After all the derivative securities are beyond the understanding of most people except perhaps those bankers dealing in derivatives.

The only conclusion is therefore that they have already made up their minds that there has been no wrongdoing by FIs. This is supported by GCT's comments that we should have put our money into CPF. Otherwise, it is our own fault.

Richard Goh said...

The authority should supervise financial institutions to ensure that relationship managers selling products are qualified to do so. It should also ensure that the financial institutions comply with a code of conduct. These are minimal requirements that our financial authority should be mindful of if we were to have a healthy system for financial operations in our country.

Anonymous said...

Banks need to increase their profits every year. RMs need to sell more aggressively to hit the new targets.

Public suffer more.

Blog Archive