Print Article

Worried industry listen to Jersey-Gov and JFSC explain increasing powers


Today [21 July], the Jersey-Gov and JFSC went LIVE (YouTube) to explain increasing powers Civil financial penalties legislation and decision making process consultations

Attendees (industry ) gave feedback on Slido hashtag #GovJFSC and to be fair; it was like an avalanche - It seems the industry is not happy - many concerns were raised – examples below

Questions  copied from slido

Is it now time for the JFSC to provide an "advisory" type function to businesses who may be seeking a view of the adequacy of something prior to implementing?

Is there a risk that will result in a rules based regulatory regime?

CO/MLCO/MLRO are not decision makers in FSBs. They may advice and assist with drafting P&P etc., but the Board runs the business and is responsible for AML

By moving back the input of business/individuals aren’t we saying that they can only appeal a decision that has already been made?

If a key person suggest changes to RP control regime which is rejected by the board, & lack of the change results in a breach does the key person have defence?

Will the protection for whistleblowers be reviewed and cross reference when considering who to subject to penalty to give those in scope more options

The following did not make is as they were Waiting for review

Why is there no requirement for the JFSC to adopt a proper structure like the UK senior managers accountability - Managers & Certification Regime (SM&CR)

Before increasing powers should Jersey Gov not take stock and hold an independent public review of the JFSC and how they do their job?

There has never been an independent public review of the JFSC with their current powers is this not now a good time before more are given to them?

Without a proper structure like the UK senior managers accountability - Managers & Certification Regime (SM&CR) the proposals are flawed

Without an independent Tribunal (EU expectation rules) there will always be questions about fairness, proportionality and consistency



The Team

Meet the team of industry experts behind Comsure

Find out more

Latest News

Keep up to date with the very latest news from Comsure

Find out more


View our latest imagery from our news and work

Find out more


Think we can help you and your business? Chat to us today

Get In Touch

News Disclaimer

As well as owning and publishing Comsure's copyrighted works, Comsure wishes to use the copyright-protected works of others. To do so, Comsure is applying for exemptions in the UK copyright law. There are certain very specific situations where Comsure is permitted to do so without seeking permission from the owner. These exemptions are in the copyright sections of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (as amended)[]. Many situations allow for Comsure to apply for exemptions. These include 1] Non-commercial research and private study, 2] Criticism, review and reporting of current events, 3] the copying of works in any medium as long as the use is to illustrate a point. 4] no posting is for commercial purposes [payment]. (for a full list of exemptions, please read here]. Concerning the exceptions, Comsure will acknowledge the work of the source author by providing a link to the source material. Comsure claims no ownership of non-Comsure content. The non-Comsure articles posted on the Comsure website are deemed important, relevant, and newsworthy to a Comsure audience (e.g. regulated financial services and professional firms [DNFSBs]). Comsure does not wish to take any credit for the publication, and the publication can be read in full in its original form if you click the articles link that always accompanies the news item. Also, Comsure does not seek any payment for highlighting these important articles. If you want any article removed, Comsure will automatically do so on a reasonable request if you email