Proceeding contribution from Peter Tapsell (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Monday, 6 February 2012. It occurred during Debate on bill on Financial Services Bill.
Financial Services Bill
The shadow Chancellor raised the question of both Barings and BCCI, and it underlines the nature of the regulatory problem. The Barings failure was largely a failure of the Singapore regulatory authority. I was closely involved with Singapore as an adviser to the monetary authority at the time. The Government in Singapore were horrified by the fact that a British rogue trader had not been spotted, but it was the responsibility of Singapore to find him. As for BCCI, which I also knew well in my stockbroking days, its regulator was in Luxembourg, which was the reason why the Bank of England did not spot the problem until too late. That problem will continue. There are considerable limits to what any regulator can ever achieve. In worldwide banking, there will always be people overseas who are up to mischief, and no regulator based in London can ever conceivably know what they are all up to.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 540 c52
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Consumers Banks Credit Building societies Bank of England Financial services Financial Services Authority Protection Regulation Financial Policy Committee Financial Conduct Authority Prudential Regulation Authority
- Legislation
- Financial Services Bill 2010-12 to 2012-13
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 15:24:53 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_807270
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_807270
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_807270