London Market Group calls for ‘ratcheting mechanism’ in financial services bill to sharpen regulator KPIs
LMG has urged for changes to be made to the financial services and markets bill
London Market Group (LMG) has called on the UK Government to add a “ratcheting mechanism” to prevent complacency in the sector as part of the Financial Services and Markets Bill.
The trade body proposed changing clause 17 of the draft bill, currently making its way through the House of Commons, in a bid to make the legislation “work better” and not “to lower the bar” of regulation.
LMG is the umbrella association that liaises with and supports the International Underwriting Association (IUA), Lloyd’s of London, the Lloyd’s Market Association (LMA), and the London and International Insurance Brokers’ Association (LIIBA).
Caroline Wagstaff argued that peers and politicians should look to ‘improve’ the bill around the “metrics for accountability” impacting regulators in an interview with the Insurance Times.
She confirmed to the outlet that it had been “lobbying the House of Lords” for amendments to clause 17 of the bill ahead of the Parliamentary summer recess, which started in July 2026.
The Financial Services and Markets Bill was designed to modernise redress arrangements and strengthen consumer protections to reflect the current market, as well as consolidate the current regulatory framework to enable clearer responsibilities, reduced regulatory fragmentation, and support innovation and stronger coordination.
The bill will also reform the Financial Ombudsman Service.
Ms Wagstaff said: “Currently, the regulators have key performance indicators (KPIs) on speed of approvals and so forth that are written into the legislation.
“The problem about that is [these KPIs are] carved in stone in perpetuity and so the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) will tell you very proudly that [it is] hitting 95% of [its] KPIs, [for example] – which to my mind is, well, maybe do it faster.
“What we’ve been asking for is what I call a ratcheting mechanism, so that those KPIs, when hit, will then get more ambitious and more granular. We’re not asking to lower the bar – we’re just asking for it to work better.”

