British MPs anger at their Financial Services Authority (FSA) continues to bubble away - the pithiest expression of the exasperation has to be this quote:
He says: “It is striking that no single official was sacked, resigned or took responsibility for a scandal that cost this country £50bn.”
That is a thought isn't it?
There might be a temptation to think of this as the need for a scapegoat but the debate could have some useful lessons for the policy making debate - in the UK more than anywhere, but also for New Zealand.
You see, either the FSA could have done better or it could not. If it could have done better, why was that?
a) If it was because they didn't have the tools, then legislators need to get busy
b) If it was because they had the tools and did not use them, then a shakeup is needed
On the other hand, if the FSA could not have done better, is it costly irrelevance?
That debate is worth having. We would gain too as we hope and plan to do better with our own Financial Markets Authority.