I am sorry to keep bobbing up and down, but the point that was made was that those in charge are very careful that there is no email trail and no written trail. That is one of the points about the reverse burden of proof: in effect it requires senior managers to allow an email trail to exist, or indeed some sort of audit trail, because they would be in a position where they would be required to demonstrate that they had taken reasonable steps. When the burden shifts back to the regulator, the regulator is completely stymied at the point where all conversations and exchanges take place in an environment where there are no minutes, no emails, no memos and no existing trail.
Bank of England and Financial Services Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Kramer
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 11 November 2015.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Bank of England and Financial Services Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
765 c2030 
Session
2015-16
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2015-11-17 11:13:59 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2015-11-11/15111158000001
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2015-11-11/15111158000001
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2015-11-11/15111158000001