MPs are voting later on whether to hold a judge led, or parliamentary inquiry into the rate rigging scandal at Barclays.
The opposition favour an inquiry led by a judge, similar to the Leveson inquiry, where as the government want parliamentary inquiry, which they believe will bring swift and decisive action.
I think if you really want results and tighter regulation on bankers a parliamentary inquiry isn’t the answer, it may well be swift and be over very quickly but it won’t go into the necessary detail needed to bring about the real changes that are desperately needed.
It would only scratch the surface and wouldn’t put any real pressure on the top executives.
However a judge led inquiry independent of the government would be able to go into much greater detail, be able to really get to the root of the problems, and make the necessary recommendations for change to keep bankers in check and remove those breaching the rules.
Yes it may take a little longer but it would be worth it and would produce more significant results than a parliamentary inquiry, maybe we could even use some of the money Barclays were fined to pay for it all.
No comments:
Post a Comment