Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Angry
Given that the veto was exercised because he couldn't guarantee protections for this sector & its practices (including those insidious methods referenced in the story) I think it's a fair comment.
|
I entirely disagree, there is no indication at all that Cameron wanted the City protected from being called to account for things like this, quite the opposite he asked for nothing more than the status quo if reports are to be believed.
Seems a convenient angle to push a pro-European agenda, I guess it stands to reason that from some commentators any trace of malpractice by banks will involve some Cameron bashing and EU worship.
The Treasury are obviously looking into this already given that the report was from consultants brought in there.
Just FYI:
Quote:
|
Tomorrow George Osborne, the chancellor of the exchequer, will give his formal response to the Vickers report on future regulation of the banks. He is expected to welcome its findings, including the recommendation of ring-fencing high street banking from investment banking services, but with the latest consultation and the preparation of a white paper expected to take several months, bankers are likely to launch fresh attempts to get the government to change some of the recommendations.
|
You are aware that EU rules and regulations potentially prevent the implementation of Vickers, yes?