|
|
Giving the government a veto over measures taken by City regulators would be a “serious concern” and damage the competitiveness of UK financial regulation, a senior official at the Bank of England has told MPs.
Sir Jon Cunliffe, a BoE deputy governor, told a parliamentary committee on Wednesday that a mooted “call-in” power allowing ministers to review regulatory decisions risked undermining perceptions of the central bank’s 25-year-long independence.
“A power which would call in, or rewrite or veto, rules would frankly, give me serious concern,” Cunliffe said. “It goes to competitiveness . . . The credibility of the institutional framework is very important to the competitiveness of the UK.” He added: “If this actually gives ministers the ability to make second judgments it would, yes, affect the perception of the independence of the regulatory part of the Bank of England.”
The Treasury’s proposed financial services and markets bill is part of a wider plan — dubbed “Big Bang 2.0” — to overhaul UK financial regulation post-Brexit to boost its global competitiveness. Under the proposals, ministers would have the authority to challenge financial regulators over decisions they disagree with — although Andrew Griffith, City minister, has pledged to use this power sparingly.
The bill would also give regulators and the BoE a duty to ensure UK competitiveness. This is controversial because it was previously the mandate of the old watchdog, the Financial Services Authority, which was seen as acting as a cheerleader for the City of London in the run-up to the 2008 financial crisis.
During her leadership campaign, Liz Truss promised to review the BoE’s mandate, although later committed to safeguarding the bank’s independence, drawn up in 1997 under a Labour government. Tensions between the BoE and the government flared up after former chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng’s announcement of the “mini” Budget last month.
A blame game between the bank officials and ministers ensued over whose policies lay behind a spike in the yield of long-dated gilts that followed the fiscal statement, which sparked a liquidity crunch for pension funds and made mortgages more expensive and harder to secure for would-be homeowners.
Cunliffe and Andrew Hauser, a BoE official, described the panic unleashed among pension funds and investment managers in the hours and days following the “mini” Budget. It was a “full-scale liquidation event”, Hauser said, adding that traders had described conditions going from “more or less manageable to: ‘completely out of control’.”...
more at FT