Response to eBA and ESMA launch consultation to revise joint guidelines for assessing the suitability of members of the management body and key function holders

Go back

Question 1: Are subject matter, scope of application, definitions and date of application appropriate and sufficiently clear?

Yes. The LME believes that the changes made remain sufficiently clear and it supports the amendments that have been made.

Question 2: Are the changes made in Title II appropriate and sufficiently clear?

Yes. The LME supports these changes and believes that the potential risk of a firm being used for terrorist financing or money laundering purposes is an appropriate reason to review the suitability of an individual, or management body as a whole. The LME supports the proposal to draw these concerns out as individual criteria.
The LME also believes that it is correct for the assessment to consider both the experience of an individual member of the management body as well as the experience of the management body as a whole.

Question 3: Are the changes made in Title III appropriate and sufficiently clear?

N/A.

Question 4: Are the requirements in section 12 sufficiently clear; are there additional measures that should be required to ensure that diversity is appropriately taken into account by institutions and that the principle of equal opportunities for all genders is appropriately reflected?

The LME supports the changes made and the strengthened provisions around gender diversity. Whilst there has been clear progress in managing gender diversity issues this remains an issue on which firms and management bodies should continue to focus. The LME believes that a small amendment to the current drafting may be appropriate in order to further reinforce this message. Accordingly the LME would propose amending the Guidelines to say: “Institutions should consider having have policies that facilitate the reintegration of staff after maternity or parental leave.”
It is important to note, however, that any such guidance around increased commitment to gender diversity should sit alongside the requirements in relation to suitability of individuals and management bodies as a whole. All appointments must continue to be made based on assessment of the competencies, experience and ability of the individual irrespective of their gender.

Question 5: Are the changes made in Title VI appropriate and sufficiently clear?

N/A

Question 6: Are the changes made in Title VII appropriate and sufficiently clear?

Yes. The changes in relation to suitability within a group context recognise the importance of ensuring consistent standards are applied and integrated within all group companies globally. The LME recognises that the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union may raise concerns around integrated suitability policies and therefore understands that the reference to “offshore financial centres” is intended to capture such a situation.

Question 7: Are the changes made in Title VIII appropriate and sufficiently clear?

Yes. The LME believes these changes are sufficiently clear and believes that the potential risk of a firm being used for terrorist financing or money laundering purposes is an appropriate reason to review the suitability of an individual, or management body as a whole. The LME supports the proposal to draw these concerns out as individual criteria.

Question 8: Are the changes made in Title IX appropriate and sufficiently clear?

N/A

Name of the organization

London Metal Exchange