MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Bank of England governance ‘defective’ with ‘centralized and hierarchical’ structure
Governance of the Bank of England is “defective”, according to the chairman of the Treasury Committee following the publication of three independent reviews into the Bank's performance. Andrew Tyrie said the reviews were too little, too late. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesNo comments on this thread? If one didn't know better, one would think Argentine economy is more important than the UK one for these hypocrites...
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 09:29 am - Link - Report abuse 01... NO comment , then you make a comment ...weirdo!!!,
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 09:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0I'm sure you realized your stupidity about 2 secs after pressing “submit comment”... I hope...
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 09:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0We have no problem allowing independent reviews and criticism of our institutions unlike some SA counties. In Argentina for example if you wish to criticise INDEC it must be done anonymously to avoid prosecution.
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 10:01 am - Link - Report abuse 0You will also have noted the comment ”it concluded that the emergency assistance achieved its purpose effectively“.
Tell me Guzz. What is hypocritical about an independent oversight committee reporting about the BofEs poor governance?
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 10:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0I mean, it isn't like the IMF and international investors calling in billions of pounds worth of debt or having government assets seized in foreign countries for non payment. Nor is anybody pointing the finger at the UK for foreign currency clamping, hyperinflation or false economic reporting. This is not INDEC towing a government line. This is a UK institution warning another UK institution to get its act together.
That is just my take Guzz. What did you read in to it?
It's not only Bank of England that is authoritarianly structured: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-20181601
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 10:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0I have just put the word 'authoritarianly' into Google. It turns out not to be a word at all.
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 11:01 am - Link - Report abuse 0Anyway. That headline is utterly misleading. The man was not sentenced for shouting anything at anybody. He was sentenced for violating a police cordon and using threatening behaviour. All of which he admitted. Nice try though, give yourself a pat on the back.
That said I support him because Cameron is a tit and Cleg is a patsy.
#1 Not to me it isn't, I have to live with Cameron's cuts madness! But a defective Bank of England, who'd'a thunk it...
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 11:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0@8
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 11:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0Just the comment one would expect from someone who thinks CFK is the answer to the worlds problems.
But unfortunately we in the UK have to live with the financial legacy left by Blair/Brown term in office with the Labour party.
Ah BK, how are you?
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 12:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I'm always curious why do you live here if you are so unhappy and love CFK so much? Genuine question.
@War Monkey
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 12:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I, too, googled the word before employing it. And guess what, I was not at all concerned by the small number of hits since anyone mastering the most basic level of English can figure out what the word means.
About the story, sorry, but it's hard to believe that a publicly funded outlet is somehow spinning the news so as to tarnish the image of the head of the government from whom said outlet receives its cash.
“”“#1 Not to me it isn't, I have to live with Cameron's cuts madness! But a defective Bank of England, who'd'a thunk it...”“”“
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 01:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0cuts aside the entire banking fiasco, and (the ultimately near-fatal malaise of ”we can do what we want to”) came about thanks to the Labour government and a certain chancellors saying that a “light touch” was all that was needed.
With the financial sector in Britain being so very, very big and so very, very powerful it is utter naivete to believe that not regulating them is a good idea.... they're bankers. Since when have bankers (money lenders) et al ever been worthy of trust without regulation?
OF COURSE their system are archaic and ineffective and irresponsible... the ruddy government gave them free license to be so.
Is there ANY part of the Biriths banking system that is fair toa nybody other than the bankers?
FFS i HAVE to pay £20 just to receive a letter, sent by a computer, to say that i am overdrawn.... and then spend 2 weeks arguing with help-desk people from India, Sri-Lanka or Lithuania that this ism in fact, illegal.
And i always (ALWAYS!( get my money back....but why does it STILL happen? Because too many British are idiotic enough to TRUST what their banks tell them.... such as “Give us your money, it will be safe with us!”
(which sounds rather like the Argentine Government and a certain leader of same)
@11 Forgetit86 (#)
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 02:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Nov 03rd, 2012 - 12:08 pm
My point being chap that all too often, the words you use are as meaningless as the sentences.
However publicly funded the BBC is, they are independent from the government. I know this is hard to understand or even believe if you live in a country where state run media is used as a government mouthpiece and quite frankly I couldn't give a toss. But like a toddler, privy to an adult conversation you saw the headline and the rest of the article was so much 'blah blah blah'. So yes, the headline is spin, if you read the rest off the article with even a modicum of objectivity you will see what that protester was really charged with and sentenced for. And I still support him for his efforts.
@11 - Forgetit
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 02:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0This is true freedom of speech as opposed to Argentina's where freedom of speech is viciously prosecuted if the government doesn't like it.
It's “true freedom of speech” to prosecute a citizen because he was less than completely polite towards the PM? As for Argentina, you're fooling yourself. The sort of stuff that happens in Britain would raise eyebrows if enforced in Argentina. You censor books on the Queen's life and forbid pictures of the pricess's breats when it was she who chose to be naked in public. Your have broacasts apologizing for giving air to the Queen's opinions on domestic policies without her permission -- as if that should be needed. The “constitutional” is increasingly giving way to the “monarchy”. And now even the PM gets to abuse UK courts' increasing deference to power.
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 04:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You still haven't read the article have you?
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 04:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Oh dear, you mean the gentleman's pact to not spy on the Royal family.
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 04:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Or the correspondent that had a private chat with the Queen and revealed the contents? The same man then subsequently apologized for betraying the Queens confidence.
That is hardly censorship.
The 'Monarchy' as you put it actually remains passive in UK matters other than the PM visiting the Queen once a week to discuss them. She does hold a significant amount of power but hasn't exercised it publicly for many years, you need to do more homework before commenting further.
This is very different than Argentina which prosecutes Economists for daring to say the truth when INDEC continues to lie and don't bother trying to defend INDEC its lies are beyond reprehensible. And then of course there is the continued harassment of Clarin and others who dare to speak out.
Nope, I am sure you probably didn't realise your mistake ! But iam not going to comment....doh
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 04:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@18 Santa Fe (#)
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 05:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Nov 03rd, 2012 - 04:56 pm
?????????????
“”“ She does hold a significant amount of power but hasn't exercised it publicly for many years, you need to do more homework before commenting further.”“”
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 06:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I dont think YOU understand the true relationship between monarchy and parliament: she isnt allowed to exercise her power, that's the ONLY reason she still has any: that she cant use it.
Its very commonly misunderstood about the relationship between monarchy and parliament...particularly amongst British, which is rather ironic...
a similar situation where Brits are utterly convinced they have a constitution...which they “dont” in so far as it is an “unwritten constitution”... yet another contradiction in terms that is often misunderstood and misrepresented.
-----------
“About the story, sorry, but it's hard to believe that a publicly funded outlet is somehow spinning the news so as to tarnish the image of the head of the government from whom said outlet receives its cash.”
Well the BBC is notoriously left-wing, so the current government is the opposite side of the street in terms of innate politics...they are the last people who the BBC would side with.... indeed the Beeb is notoriously “anti” most governments as it bends over far too much to appear to be neutral, to the point where it no longer is neutral (as it has often been called anti-british as well as left-wing).
Such contradictions are fairly common in British society and generally little understood abroad.... heck, half the Brits dont understand them either.
“too little, too late”
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 06:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Great Slogan for the Coservative party, don't you think?
3 Guzz
“I'm sure you realized your stupidity about 2 secs after pressing “submit comment”... I hope...”
Pity it doesn't work for you though huh Guzz me ol' china? pity you don't think to yourself “does this make sense?” or “Am I making a fool of myself?” before you post............. Oh well.......
At least an investigation tells you, that the law will slowly catch them up,
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 07:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But a very interesting point of note,
Not one banker , head , or boss , has ever been prosecuted over the banking fiasco,
The banks are a disgrace, but are there to make money [are they not]
They should be controlled and regulated properly, ,the corruption cut out, and the bosses put away.
Still,
as long as they pick up their bonuses, why should they care,
[Cameron get ya finger out of ya backside, and bring them to book]
Even if they are some of his mates.
Mmmmmmmm
p/s can I present a bill for this comment, its worth at least a million.
@20 - Anbar, you are talking in suppositions and not facts. I spoke in facts and she does still wield a huge amount of power the misunderstanding is yours in that you are trying to predict the course of events if she used her power, see the bit where you got it wrong?
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 08:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The truth of the matter is SHE STILL DOES HAVE THE POWER but doesn't need to directly use it since she heavily influences the PM in her weekly meetings with him. If you hadn't of noticed the PM has to report to her and not the other way around. It's been said countless times in PM's autobiographies that she has instructed the PM to act (which she can do) rather than to directly exercise her powers.
This is the misunderstanding foreigners often have in missing the subtle ways the British system works.
“” see the bit where you got it wrong?”
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 09:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0not really.. my law professors were pretty clear about that at both graduate and post-graduate levels.
how bout you?
This is what you lot should be doing. Cleaning your own front door before spreading nonsense of things you obviously fail to comprehend...
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 09:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Very clear thanks.....
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 10:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I worked in this area for a while so rather than post assumptions from afar I actually know how it works.
Its interesting you base your reality on incomplete assumptions though....
#22 Great comment =) But if Cameron did what you wanted, the vulture funds and their allies would treat him like Cristina has been treated!
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 10:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@25 Guzz (#)
Nov 03rd, 2012 - 11:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Nov 03rd, 2012 - 09:53 pm
“you lot”.
We generalising again Guzz?
@Xect,
Nov 04th, 2012 - 09:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0anybody can google “what real power does the british monarch hold?”.... and find out for themselves... its pretty easy to do... even try looking up “Constitutional Monarchy” as opposed to “Monarchy”.
Its amazing that i find myself agreeing with Guzz though... some of the people who comment here are clueless about their own country, yet cant wait to rubbish somebody elses.
-----------
#22 Great comment =) But if Cameron did what you wanted, the vulture funds and their allies would treat him like Cristina has been treated!
Not likely to happen though is it? They already own the UK parliamentary process, so why would any PM go against the bankers? ¬_¬
29... Yet 99 % of the Argentine posters / trolls think that in 1833 the UK stole the islands off them, which is in correct....the whole basis of the malvista claim is in correct. Put your own house in order before criticising other people's knowledge.
Nov 04th, 2012 - 10:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0@29 - I find it amazing you are still arguing this after how weak and ill researched your original post is.
Nov 04th, 2012 - 03:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0To help you out, I've provided the official list of powers of the Queen.
The appointment and dismissal of ministers;
The summoning, prorogation and dissolution of Parliament;
Royal assent to bills;
The appointment and regulation of the civil service;
The commissioning of officers in the armed forces;
Directing the disposition of the armed forces in the UK;
Appointment of Queen's Counsel;
Issue and withdrawal of passports;
Prerogative of mercy
Granting honours;
Creation of corporations by Charter;
Foreign Affairs
The making of treaties;
Declaration of war;
Deployment of armed forces overseas;
Recognition of foreign states;
Accreditation and reception of diplomats.
I don't find it unusual that you misunderstand the subject as many foreigners often do, I do however find it amazing that your law professors are teaching you assumptions as opposed to facts like the above, scary stuff indeed and if that wasn't enough you've topped it off by claiming my ignorance on the subject.
Read up more before posting further.
#29 Well indeed, which makes Cristina's defiance all the more impressive...
Nov 04th, 2012 - 04:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@29 - I find it amazing you are still arguing this after how weak and ill researched your original post is.
Nov 04th, 2012 - 05:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Who’s arguing? I’ don’t need to!
A wag once said “The Queen can do anything she wants to - once!”
When you understand the significance of that, come back and we’ll talk again.
@32: Not really... he's only looked as far as a page to support his post , then omitted the other half of the story. Which, given that this is something the “Brits” so very often criticise Argentinians for (on this website f.ex) rather proves my point: If you cannot be bothered to educate yourself on your own country, why set yourself up as an expert on somebody else's AND criticise them for not bothering to look things up (such as the FI history prior to “usurption”).
They epitomise PRECISELY what they ridicule about Argentinians “not bothering to look up the truth”. .. All they do is go far enough to find a bit of information to backup their POST, they arent even interested in finding out facts. I mean, you know they haven't even TRIED to do so.
Yet every single day, here they will be, telling all Argentina to go look up the “truth” about the Falklands history.
If YOU cannot be bother, if YOU are more interested in appearing right, than actual reading-up on something, then get off the ruddy high-horse telling all of Argentina to go do precisely that.
hypocrites the lot of them.
Thanks Anbar, all I have ever done is deal in facts that she is a very powerful woman, be careful in calling others ignorant when you are dealing in assumptions.
Nov 04th, 2012 - 06:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0However if you feel like continuing to post unsubstantiated opinions then carry on.
Anyway there is little point to carry this on as I'm talking about the present and you are talking about the future, two separate entities. I prefer to avoid the crystal ball approach.
All the best,
Xect.
#33 Whatever you think of the Falklands, Argentina is good on the banks issue though, no? And thats an issue far closer to my, and I suspect Cristina's, heart...
Nov 05th, 2012 - 12:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0ahhh, no wonder the “vultures” eying the UK and meanwhile, more austerity is coming (pay more for less service or none at all).
Nov 06th, 2012 - 05:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!