The curious case of Paul Moore and HBOS

Are you suggesting that there may not have been a sufficiently robust risk culture within the banks Liz?!

Paul Moore's disclosure is significant in that it removes ignorance as an explanation (although it could never be an excuse) - something which many at board level have sought to hide behind over the past year - 'we didn't know about it, so how could we have prevented it...'. Moore's claims, if true, make the board firmly accountable and ultimately culpable. I see 'SOX-like' regulation on the horizon, with formal sign off of risk positions against the CEO's name.....then we'll see the risk culture start to change.

A robust risk culture that needs to be undertood by those actually working in risk?! Matthew, what strange and wonderfull world are describing?

Really, just post your Risk Mission Statement up on a sandwich board in the lobby of your bank's headquarters and everyone will automatically have a full understanding of the bank's risk culture. I've heard that screen savers work well in that department as well! 

Bravo Elizabeth for saying out loud what many of us have known all along. Bank Boards and bank CEOs don't like bad news and invariably, if they are doing their jobs properly, Risk Managers and their views are NOT welcome especially if it could damage profits and more importantly, bonuses.

I want to add a quote from my blog entitled "Lip Service" (8th October 2008)  - https://www.finextra.com/blogs/fullblog.aspx?blogid=1946

"It's a contest between profit and extra costs and the profit motive always wins out. Bank executives don't like Jonahs (i.e. a person who carries a "jinx", one who will bring bad luck to any enterprise). Profits get them bonuses. Costs reduce profits. Also the "whiz kid" innovators are like the golden goose and you don't tell them that their eggs are inedible!"