The UK insolvency regulatory system is being tinkered with, but it needs to be and be seen to be more effective. For that it needs a more robust design. At present it neither gives confidence to the public nor serves the profession well, often appearing to act too slowly or opaquely and with insufficient unanimity. The profession must be believed to be one of integrity, and that integrity has not only to be delivered by the profession but to be validated by a regulatory regime on which the public and the profession can rely.
Most people in the insolvency world believe that we would not start from here if designing an insolvency regulatory system. However we live and work in the real world and must face reality. Whatever the vested interests of those who regulate, the imperative is for public interest and the profession to be well served by regulation. Many would favour, but would be unlikely to fight for, a single regulator. I find it hard to identify a good solution for regulating 1,700 insolvency practitioners that involves regulatory competition. However, I acknowledge that there may be real world challenges in creating a single insolvency regulator. Whatever the outcome of that debate, what is clear is that regulation should be transparent and should be and be seen to be effective.
Date: 16th February, 2015
Articles from this Author
26th June, 2017
The Recast European Insolvency Regulation (the “Recast EIR”)
28th November, 2016
Corporate Advisory Services & Brexit
13th July, 2016
While every accelerated M&A is different, finding the right adviser is always essential
25th May, 2016
Review of the Corporate Insolvency Framework
Contact a Partner
For the latest Mercer & Hole news, visit our LinkedIn page mercer-&-hole