THE head of the City watchdog has denied he was under political pressure to ask banks to slow down the pace of their Brexit relocation plans.
The FCA last week wrote to banks warning them to limit the number of clients they move from London to the European Union as a result of Britain's departure from the trading bloc.
Andrew Bailey, the chief executive of the Financial Conduct Authority, said that the regulator wrote the letters to the heads of at least five banks "off our own initiative".
Mr Bailey, speaking before the Treasury Committee, said: "I know we have been accused of being political here, but I don't think we are. [What is written in the letters has] been entirely consistent with our objectives and statute to firms.
"We are aware there are some pressure on firms and there are discussions about what we might call ensuring there's a critical mass of business moved over to a European Union entity that's being created."
He said that if UK-based firms are considering moving non-EU business from London, then they should "make those decisions in the interest of the client" in order to treat customers fairly.
In the letter, first reported by Financial News, the FCA said: "Clients should not be moved out of the UK until the FCA is satisfied that the relevant UK boards and/or senior managers have fully considered the impact of their firms' proposals on every category of client, including whether their proposed changes are in each client's best interests."
One of the letters, signed by Megan Butler, head of supervision at the FCA, said that banks should "make the minimum necessary changes required" and that clients "should not be moved out of the UK until the FCA is satisfied" that the full impact has been considered.
The letter comes after lobby group Frankfurt Main Finance said that it expects 800 billion euro (£711 billion) of assets to move from London to Frankfurt as lenders prepare for Brexit.
Several London-based banks have indicated they will shift jobs to Frankfurt or other financial hubs in Paris and Dublin, which are also vying to take some of London's business.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here