View more on these topics

Government ignores TSC warnings over BofE governance

The Government has decided not to radically reform or scrap the Court of the Bank of England, despite warnings from the Treasury select committee that more effective governance is required.

Last night, the Chancellor George Osborne announced he was backing a Bank of England plan to establish an oversight committee under the Court charged with scrutinising the Bank’s work on financial stability.

TSC chairman Andrew Tyrie warned last month that this proposal did not go far enough and called on the Government to back the TSC’s plan to replace the Court with a new supervisory board to create “a proper board that is fit for the 21st Century”.

Speaking during the second reading debate on the financial services bill last night, Osborne said: “While I do not propose to abolish the Court of the Bank of England, I do propose to give it important new powers to hold the executive Bank to account.

“The Governor and the Court of the Bank of England have agreed that a new oversight committee, consisting of the non-executive members of the court, should be created. This group of external independent people will ensure that the Bank discharges its financial oversight responsibilities correctly.”

Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls said: “We think that there is further to go to ensure that there is proper accountability and we will be proposing reforms.”

The Bank’s Court came in for heavy criticism after a poor performance in front of the TSC. Shadow Business Secretary Chuka Umunna, who was then a member of the committee, said Mervyn King had the Court “under his thumb”.

In its report into accountability at the Bank, the TSC warned that under the new regulatory architecture the Bank will become a “super-regulator” and called for its accountability to be strengthened. The committee’s call for future Bank governors to serve one non-renewable eight year term instead of the current two five-year term limit has been accepted by the Government. However, its call for a veto over the appointment of future governors has been rejected.

TSC member and Conservative MP for Wyre Forest Mark Garnier told MPs: “The Chancellor took the unprecedented and extremely welcome move of giving the Treasury committee a power of veto over the appointment of the chairman of the Office for Budget Responsibility. Now we have seen how well that works in practice, we think the governor’s appointment is another occasion for which such a power of veto would be appropriate.”


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 8 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Does this mean that the TSC can be disbanded?

  2. The TSC should have a veto over the appointment of BofE governor’s forever. That is the only way to stop cronyism and Hector Sants being appointed.

  3. Incompetent Regulators Award Team 7th February 2012 at 10:00 am

    Tyrie the only decent guy who understands anything is ignored once again. What is the point of any of these committees? Alsations with no teeth!

  4. The current system of Government was good for the 19th Century. It is now a farce, with a fundamental reform required. Executive decisions are now far more complex and far reaching. The current structure of Parliament has moved from MPs being a necessary check on the exercise of that power to being compliant signatories in most cases. Opposition tends to come from the HoLs rather than the HoCs, mainly because so many MPs are career MPs looking for promotion to the Executive. It is hardly likely they will make life hard for the current incumbents. A radically different format is required, urgently.
    Without that change such proposals by The Chancellor will go through on the nod 98% of the time. And why would the Chancellor want to introduce meaningful levels of scrutiny into the process of Government. It is a nice cosy arrangement at the moment. Bend a little to current comment by making a meaningless and toothless change, and life can continue as before.
    I can well understand why a Government does not want to impose too many problems for itself. But surely Parliament, as representative of the British Public should be demanding more and be entitled to impose more.
    Having a bunch of eunuchs in attendance is hardly likely to provide true satisfaction.

  5. It strikes me that the TSC mean nothing so why do we have them.

    The FSA ignores their recommendation and now the government so why are we paying huge salaries to individuals who mean nothing!!

  6. Roger Holloway- My earlier point entirely- what is the TSC roll if it is impotent?

  7. Does the TSC have any influence at all in any area of politics or government? Seemingly not (as Hector Sants will readily attest).

Leave a comment


Why register with Money Marketing ?

Providing trusted insight for professional advisers.  Since 1985 Money Marketing has helped promote and analyse the financial adviser community in the UK and continues to be the trusted industry brand for independent insight and advice.

News & analysis delivered directly to your inbox
Register today to receive our range of news alerts including daily and weekly briefings

Money Marketing Events
Be the first to hear about our industry leading conferences, awards, roundtables and more.

Research and insight
Take part in and see the results of Money Marketing's flagship investigations into industry trends.

Have your say
Only registered users can post comments. As the voice of the adviser community, our content generates robust debate. Sign up today and make your voice heard.

Register now

Having problems?

Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3712

Lines are open Monday to Friday 9:00am -5.00pm