Bank of England: Brussels is an obstacle to reducing risk

[lilelvis2000]

If only the BoE had been allowed to manage banks from 1997 onwards and Mr Brown and Balls hadn't implemented they crap, short sighted regulatory shortcuts.

They still would have followed the US down the pipe.

[AtW]

The BoE couldn't have increased interest rates in early 2000 due to the onset of a mini recession.

It's not their job to deal with recession - it's the Govts job.

HTH

[eek]

To be honest I don't think it would have made a material difference - BoE is "independent" with Govt (Chancellor) appointing half of the people there and having massive influence over the rest.

BoE could have increased interest rates in early 2000 to stop real estate bubble - that was entirely in its power, on paper at least.

The BoE couldn't have increased interest rates in early 2000 due to the onset of a mini recession.

The real problem has always been banks willingness to lend money to people regardless of their ability to pay. Banks always are their own worse enemy. However this is really a discussion for a different forum not the playground that is contractoruk.

[AtW]

If only the BoE had been allowed to manage banks from 1997 onwards and Mr Brown and Balls hadn't implemented they crap, short sighted regulatory shortcuts.

To be honest I don't think it would have made a material difference - BoE is "independent" with Govt (Chancellor) appointing half of the people there and having massive influence over the rest.

BoE could have increased interest rates in early 2000 to stop real estate bubble - that was entirely in its power, on paper at least.

[TimberWolf]

When is he going to start running around with his shorts around his ankles being chased by angry women?

[eek]

AtW's comment: if only Europe had a pair of safe hands like BoE:

If only the BoE had been allowed to manage banks from 1997 onwards and Mr Brown and Balls hadn't implemented they crap, short sighted regulatory shortcuts.

[AtW]

"Brussels has demanded that key banking regulations are set centrally, making national supervisors little more than arms-length officials policing the EU code. However, in a discussion paper on the new "toolkit" of powers the Bank is requesting to prevent a rerun of the financial crisis, it warned that Brussels was proving an obstacle to reducing systemic risk.

The Bank also appeared to endorse David Cameron's decision to veto the revised EU treaty after failing to secure additional safeguards for independent UK financial regulation.

The broadside against Brussels came in a consultation document from the Bank's Financial Policy Committee (FPC), which will have the power to instruct lenders to increase capital buffers or demand larger deposits from homebuyers to prevent dangerous bubbles forming in the financial system.

The document proposed 15 "tools" and cited examples of where the powers have been used and with what success to open a broad consultation with banks and users of finance. Responses are due by March next year, when the Bank will decide which "tools" to recommend to the Treasury.

"The key hurdle arising with the national discretion criterion is that the powers may be constrained by EU law," the Bank said. "In particular, the draft Capital Requirements Regulation is a so-called 'maximum harmonising' regulation. "

Source: Bank of England: Brussels is an obstacle to reducing risk - Telegraph

AtW's comment: if only Europe had a pair of safe hands like BoE: