Q: What has been the genesis of the Polish Financial Supervision Authority?
A: The major phenomenon on financial markets entails the emergence of groups operating in various segments of the market (banking, insurance, investment funds and pension schemes, brokerages). The consolidation of the financial market has necessitated an integration of the supervision system because proper assessment of risks and capital security on a group level can only be carried out by an integrated supervisor. That is why the European Parliament recommended on November 6, 2002 that EU member countries ensure full supervision consolidation of the financial market outside the central bank. This task has been set out in the European Union’s Capital Requirements Directive (CRD) and the Financial Conglomerate Directive (FCD). In accordance with the CRD, financial institutions shall apply internal risk assessment policies and procedures (approved on the capital group level). In 2006, a pragmatic decision was taken on consolidating financial supervision in Poland. At present, the PFSA supervises the insurance and capital markets as well as the capital pension scheme. As of January 1, 2008, its responsibilities will also cover supervision of banks.
Q: Who are the members of the Financial Supervision Authority?
A: The Financial Supervision Authority consists of seven members. Apart from three persons making up its Presidium (the chairman and two vice-chairmen) and running its affairs on a day-to-day basis, involved in taking major decisions are representatives of government institutions concerned with the financial market, and these are the Ministry of Finance and Department of Labour, the National Bank of Poland as well as the Polish President’s Office. Such composition of the PFSA assures its autonomy and decisions are taken after intense exchange of views between people from different quarters. 
Q: What are the prerogatives of the Polish Financial Supervision Authority and how do they compare to those in other EU countries?
A: In its proceedings, the PFSA is pursuing its statutory tasks of ensuring proper functioning of the financial market, its stability, security and transparency as well as building confidence in the financial market and protecting the interests of its players. In line with PFSA’s philosophy of exercising supervision, one of its most essential tasks is to support the development of the Polish financial market. Its priorities in this respect entail educating the society on financial matters, pursuing a dialogue with market players and assuring financial market transparency.
The changes that are taking place are all targeted at integrating supervision. Benefits of integration are greatest when this is done outside the structures of the central bank (as was the case in Poland).
Q: How important, do you think, is PFSA’s membership of the European Assembly of Financial Regulators?
A: Each segment of the financial market operating within the EU framework has its committee dealing with the introduction of changes. Due to its totally dispersed supervision system, Poland’s voice on the international scene concerning some similar issues stood apart from and did not integrate with others. The present form of PFSA guarantees not only an integrated but also a much stronger voice. This is one institution, which can effectively present the country’s position on matters connected with integration processes on EU financial markets.
Q: Does the Polish financial and insurance sectors – that is the ones that the PFSA deals with – need any legislative or organisational changes?
A: The Polish Financial Supervision Authority is seeking new standards of communication and cooperation with the market. We are all playing in one team and we are all concerned with the development of the financial market in Poland. Hence what the PFSA is aspiring to, is to become the host and partner for the market. Quoting an example of what needs to be done: I think that standards of drawing up legislative acts leave much to be desired. The drafting of any new law should be preceded by an economic analysis. In our reality that mechanism did not function well – very often the need to adopt new regulations was perceived too late and so there was no time to carry out a proper analysis and new regulations were adopted almost at once. Moreover, many such new regulations turned out to be one-sided settling as they were issues that were important for one interest group only. In the case of indisputable issues, the matter was simple, but many draft regulations gave rise to controversies and disputes. And in such cases the other side, upon realizing its helplessness in dispute with the regulator, stirred up polemics in the media in an attempt to exert pressure in favour of its interests. Rather than having an experts’ debate, we had a media scramble. That has to be changed. It is the view of the PFSA that any legislative changes have to be preceded by wide consultations and debates. Good law has to take all points of view into account.