More Power for the Bank of England?

George Osborne, Shadow Chancellor and MP for Tatton suggests that a Tory administration would give more powers to the Bank of England to oversee financial institutions. Mr. Osborne says "The tripartite system between the chancellor, the Bank of England and the FSA has simply failed."

That may be so, but giving more control to the Bank of England will in my view create more problems. The Bank of England is a financial institute and quite rightly is wholly or at least mainly concerned with financial affairs. (Quite advantageous to rich Tories, I suggest.)

Better the Bank of England should be given control over financial considerations, but where these financial considerations have an impact on the social structure and the poorer members of society who have no means of controlling the decisions that impact on them, a body of politicians (multi party), charitable institutions, sociologists and independent thinkers should be a party to those decisions with a power of veto if the majority disagree with the Bank of England.

Each member of this committee should show they have no personal interests in the policy and decisions of the Bank of England over and above those of the ordinary citizen. To declare an interest should not be enough.

I consider that this committee should consist of volunteers who will not benefit from being a committee member. No wages, no expenses, merely a commitment to fair play and policies to benefit the people, not the rich people.

To prevent the super rich commandeering the committee, being the only ones who can afford to do it for free a reasonable allowance could be allowable for those that can show genuine hardship.

And how about a sub-committee of us plebeians, elected to the job by local people to whom the committee report and take a remit?

This is my suggestion for a fair system of financial and economic decision making. The mechanics of how it might work must be decided by those more able than I in such matters.