In a column published by the Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets, Chair Laura van Geest argues that effective supervision should help firms learn and improve rather than focus primarily on punishment. In the context of financial supervision, she says this means setting clear expectations, allowing room for initial imperfections when new rules are introduced, and creating conditions in which institutions can reflect and correct course without immediately becoming defensive. Van Geest says the authority has not always struck that balance well, noting that past communications sometimes combined encouragement and sanction in the same message and that the punitive element was often what firms took away. She says the Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets now more often uses anonymised market overviews supported by named examples of good practice, while giving individual institutions their own results separately. The column also cites cases where supervisory and enforcement pressure can create counterproductive behaviour, including banks' anti-money laundering work, where criminal cases against individual directors contributed to excessive risk aversion, and the audit sector, where attention shifted from actual quality improvement to producing documentary evidence.
Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets2026-07-03
Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets chair outlines a less punitive supervisory approach centred on learning and anonymised market feedback
In a column, Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets Chair Laura van Geest says supervision works better when it promotes learning and improvement rather than relying mainly on punitive pressure. She says the authority is using anonymised market feedback and named good practices more often, while warning that excessive enforcement pressure can drive defensive behaviour in areas such as anti-money laundering controls and audit quality.