It's the same old story that we've heard over and over. Easy regulations plus even easier implementation of the regulations. In this case, the former (Labour) government is blamed but the regulation failure which sounds fair, but also not out of the ordinary for any government. We saw the same behavior in the US under both Clinton and Bush and we know that Obama has not taken a tough line against the bankers as well when it comes to regulation. Governments of all flavors get addicted to the growth numbers that the bankers generate during the good times and are afraid of doing anything to stop it.
If only Lord Turner's report on the Royal Bank of Scotland failure wasn't such a common story.
"The fact that no individual has been found legally responsible for the failure begs the question: if action cannot be taken under existing rules, should not the rules be changed for the future?" Turner said.
"In a market economy, companies take risks on behalf of shareholders and if they make mistakes, it is for shareholders to sanction the management and board by firing them.
But banks are different, because excessive risk-taking by banks, for instance through aggressive acquisitions, can result in bank failure, taxpayer losses, and wider economic harm. Their failure is a public concern, not just a concern for shareholders," he added.
