On BBC News 24 at 3pm today, I was asked about the debate over whether to have a Parliamentary or a judge-led inquiry into banking. I made the point that judges apply the law and MPs make it. (In relation to banking, we are far beyond matters of judge-made common law.)
Whereas Leveson is primarily about the law as it is, any inquiry into banking must look at the institutional framework which has allowed ordinary and predictable self interest to manifest itself in such a wide and deep banking crisis. The nature of the institutions of our society are Parliament’s responsibility.
It’s true that I believe we must rise above personality and party politics. I think the situation far more serious than is generally understood. Parliament should exercise some deep critical thought about money, banking and finance. Unlike Labour, I’m sure there is plenty of relevant expertise in the House.
After all that has happened, our democracy must be built up. It would be wrong for Parliament to fail to rise to this great challenge of our time.
1. Why have you exempted yourself from Money Laundering regulations?
2. Why have you exempted yourself from tax investigations by HMRC?
You make the law.
Perhaps you can tell us why you think MPs need this protection and what you are doing that you don’t want to be investigated?
As I told you before, the former was a Telegraph red herring. The latter you should provide me with evidence.