The regulator this morning set about gathering opinions on the guiding set of principles around the strategic choices it makes.

It has laid out 26 questions for professionals to give their views on. See these below.

A new Mission document will “inform the FCA’s strategy and day-to-day work over the coming years”, following the launch of a consultation today.

A statement read: “The FCA has a large and complex remit, and finite resources with which to fulfil it. It has clear objectives set by Parliament, principally to ensure that relevant markets function well.

“The intention of the Mission is to provide clarity over the objectives, the methods to allow it to focus its efforts in the right places as well as explaining the reasoning behind the work the FCA does and a framework on how it chooses the tools it uses to do it.

“In developing the Mission, the FCA will be seeking engagement across the breadth of its stakeholders. Consultation with these groups will have a fundamental impact on the shape of the final strategy.

Andrew Bailey, FCA chief executive, said: “Establishing and embedding a clear mission for the FCA is critical to our success, both as a regulator and to UK financial services as a whole.

“Our Mission will set out a framework within which we prioritise our work, ensuring we focus our resources in the right places. This will improve accountability and transparency of how and why we make the choices that we do.

“The Mission will only be a success if our stakeholders engage with us through this consultation process. We want this to be a very open process. Out of it, we hope that we can set out a clear path ahead for financial conduct regulation in the UK.”

The questions:

Q1: Do you think our definition of a well-functioning market is complete? What other characteristics do you think we should consider?

Q2: Do you think our approach to consumer loss in wellfunctioning markets is appropriate?

Q3: Do you think we have got the balance right between individual due diligence and the regulator’s role in enforcing market discipline?

Q4: Do you think the distinction we make between wholesale and retail markets is right? If not, can you tell us why and what other factors you believe we should consider?

Q5: Do you think the way we measure performance is meaningful? What other criteria do you think are central to measuring our effectiveness?

Q6: Do you think the way we interpret our objective to protect and enhance the integrity of the UK financial system is appropriate? Are there other aspects you think we should include?

Q7: Do you think our intervention framework is the correct one?

Q8: Where do you believe the boundary between broader policy and the FCA’s regulatory responsibility lies?

Q9: Is our understanding of the benefits and risk of price discrimination and cross subsidy correct? Is our approach to intervention the right one?

Q10: Does increased individual responsibility increase the need and scope for a greater and more innovative regulatory response?

Q11: Would a Duty of Care help ensure that financial markets function well?

Q12: Is our approach to offering consumers greater protection for more complex products the right one?

Q13: Is our regulatory distinction between consumers with greater and lesser capability appropriate?

Q14: Is our approach to redress schemes for issues outside our regulatory perimeter the right one? Would more specific
criteria help firms and consumers?

Q15: What more can we do to ensure consumers using redress schemes feel they are receiving the appropriate level of personal attention?

Q16: Is our approach to giving vulnerable consumers greater levels of protection the right one?

Q17: Is our approach to the effectiveness of disclosure based on the right assumption?

Q18: Given the evidence, is it appropriate for us to take a more ‘interventionist’ approach where conventional disclosure steps prove ineffective?

Q19: Do you think our approach to deciding when to intervene will help make FCA decisions more predictable?

Q20: Are there any other factors we ought to consider when deciding whether to intervene?

Q21: What more do you think we could do to improve our communication about our interventions?

Q22: Is there anything else in addition to the points set out above that it would be helpful for us to communicate when consulting on new proposals?

Q23: Do you think it is our role to encourage innovation?

Q24: Do you think our approach to firm failure is appropriate?

Q25: Do you think more formal discussions with firms about lessons learned will help improve regulatory outcomes?

Q26: Do you think that private warnings are consistent with our desire to be more transparent?