PracticeConsultingView from the House – Austin Mitchell

View from the House - Austin Mitchell

The Insolvency Working Party’s report is a last-gasp attempt to preserve the failed system of Chaps regulating Chaps. That’s hardly surprising. The working party is dominated by Chaps and their vested interests.

It carefully excluded consumers and stakeholders from its deliberations.

Its main concern is to preserve the privileges and powers of the seven Recognised Professional Bodies (RPBs). They regulate only 1,800 insolvency practitioners, all of whom enjoy a state-guaranteed monopoly without any effective control or accountability. The working party’s remit was to keep it that way.

So the report is an exercise in public relations. It fails to provide any statistics about fees collected by the corporate undertakers, the number of jobs rescued or lost, or practitioners’ conflicts of interests.

There is no information about the number of complaints, the failures of the RPBs to act over them, or the time taken to investigate them. There is not even any suggestion that practitioners should be required to publish worthwhile information and no proposal to have the RPBs and practitioners owe a ‘duty of care’ to individual stakeholders affected by their actions.

All we have is a load of rhetoric about serving ‘the public interest’ but with no indication of exactly how they serve it or even take it into account.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: only independent regulation can now restore public confidence in insolvency as in other services.

We need durable structure commanding public respect not a puncture repair kit for a bankrupt penny-farthing.

The process of regulation must be independent of the established vested interests of the accountancy and law firms and their trade associations.

This principle can only be achieved by setting up a single ‘new body’ to be responsible for accrediting, licensing, monitoring and disciplining all insolvency practitioners. That body should report to the Department of Trade and Industry and the Commons Select Committee but be independent of both. Only such a body can now command real public confidence.

Related Articles

5 tips for SMEs to protect cash flow

Accounting Software 5 tips for SMEs to protect cash flow

5m Alia Shoaib, Reporter
Tyrie on Finance Bill 2017: ‘Making Tax Policy Better’

Consulting Tyrie on Finance Bill 2017: ‘Making Tax Policy Better’

11m Stephanie Wix, Writer
Managing partner Q&A - the year ahead: Richard Toone, CVR Global

Accounting Firms Managing partner Q&A - the year ahead: Richard Toone, CVR Global

12m Kevin Reed, Writer
Deloitte 'self-imposes exile' on government contracts to defuse PM row

Accounting Firms Deloitte 'self-imposes exile' on government contracts to defuse PM row

12m Kevin Reed, Writer
Managing partner Q&A - the year ahead: Julie Adams, Menzies

Accounting Firms Managing partner Q&A - the year ahead: Julie Adams, Menzies

12m Kevin Reed, Writer
Friday Afternoon Live: Deloitte's tech thing; PAC wants HMRC 'contingencies'; and Sports Direct

Business Regulation Friday Afternoon Live: Deloitte's tech thing; PAC wants HMRC 'contingencies'; and Sports Direct

1y Kevin Reed, Writer
Friday Afternoon Live: HMRC complaints rise; Deloitte scoops big audits; and corporate reporting woes

Audit Friday Afternoon Live: HMRC complaints rise; Deloitte scoops big audits; and corporate reporting woes

1y Kevin Reed, Writer
New head of equity capital markets for KPMG

Accounting Firms New head of equity capital markets for KPMG

1y Stephanie Wix, Writer