If we didn't have the FSA, who would we have to blame?

Yesterday Lord Turner dared to criticise G. Brown. Turner was defending his SFA against the charge that they failed to keep a tight rein on banks. He asserted that Brown as chancellor had asked for a light regulation!

Now we know that the SFA, perhaps stung by criticism, is making its plans for the future. One aspect is the diminution of the role of the market in financial services, adopting a risk averse strategy by determining for the banks in advance which products and services they may offer, and they may go about their business. We shall know the details on March 18th, it seems.

It is broadly comparable to somebody telling the train operating companies the shape of scheduled services they must adopt - times, ticket prices, etc.

There will thus apparently be no scope for creative competition, except on price for the range of permitted products. This could be devastating for London, which has hitherto been adaptive, creative and world leading in its product changes. Indeed its preeminent position was due to its ability to create and innovate. This will come under question now.

This is yet another example of the new socialism, which seeks to control every aspect of capitalism, in the end, of course, so hamstringing it that it ceases to be effective. Never mind if we don't grow, so long as we are all equal.

It could well make the recovery from depression/recession more drawn out. If innovation is discouraged, then creativeness will go elsewhere, for us to follow later in their shadow.