I accept that point, which has been made clear all the way through, but that is negative language rather than positive. Instead of telling the FPC, ““In carrying out your duties, you mustn't adversely affect growth””, I would rather put it to work with the MPC on ensuring that we have a buoyant economy with steady, acceptable growth and employment levels. At the moment, apart from the negative words that the hon. Gentleman quotes, all we have is the requirement of financial stability.
The hon. Gentleman was with a number of colleagues here on the Treasury Committee. We go through accountability with the MPC. It is bad enough trying to get the Governor of the Bank of England to be accountable even when he has a named target; what would he be like, or what would a future Governor be like, when he came before the Committee to which he was accountable and only had to defend his actions on the grounds of financial stability, which cannot be defined? It is a case of the emperor's new clothes. There really should be a joint mandate, with a definition of financial stability and an acceptance of the Government's picture of growth and employment.
Financial Services Bill
Proceeding contribution from
George Mudie
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 23 April 2012.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Financial Services Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
543 c750 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 16:56:40 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_824707
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_824707
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_824707