All we want from 監視者s is competence

By THIS IS MONEY
Updated: 11:34 BST, 27 December 2009

?

It has not been a good end to the year for some of our 商売／仕事 監視者s - or at least not for the Office of Fair 貿易（する）ing and the 競争 （売買）手数料，委託（する）／委員会／権限.

In the last days before the Christmas holiday began, both of these 中心存在s of the 商売／仕事 community were humbled. First, an 控訴，上告s 法廷 支配するd that the （売買）手数料，委託（する）／委員会／権限's 事例／患者 against airports 操作者 BAA could be se en to be biased.

Then the OFT 譲歩するd 敗北・負かす in its 事例／患者 against the banks for their extortionate 告発（する），告訴（する）／料金s for unauthorised overdrafts.

Both 事例／患者s have been going on for years. Both have doubtless cost 抱擁する sums of public money, not least in 料金s to the 合法的な profession. And both appeared to fail, not because the 幅の広い thrust of their 事例／患者 was wrong (in both examples, those 手渡すing out the 判決，裁定s did so with 明らかな 悔いる), but because the 監視者s have failed to 焦点（を合わせる） on the 詳細（に述べる）s.

The （売買）手数料，委託（する）／委員会／権限 had 支配するd that BAA was a monopoly and 主張するd it sell several airports to 増加する 競争. The 控訴，上告s 法廷 支配するd that because one of the （売買）手数料，委託（する）／委員会／権限 members was linked to a 地元の 当局 that had shown an 利益／興味 in buying one of BAA's airports, there was the chance it would be seen as biased.

In the 事例／患者 of the OFT versus the banks, the High 法廷，裁判所 支配するd that the OFT did not have the 力／強力にする to 裁判官 whether 告発（する），告訴（する）／料金s were fair. However, many 観察者／傍聴者s felt that had the OFT chosen to challenge the bank 告発（する），告訴（する）／料金s on 欠如（する） of 競争 rather than fairness, it would probably have won.

Indeed, this is what the High 法廷，裁判所 itself seemed to 暗示する, for it is true that unauthorised overdraft 告発（する），告訴（する）／料金s are not only very high, but are also uncannily 類似の for all banks.

In both these 事例／患者s there is more than a hint of hubris. Both regulators thought that they had their 事例／患者s sewn up, but a 欠如（する） of attention to 詳細（に述べる） or indeed a 無視（する） for sensible 手続きs has led them to humiliation. In the 事例／患者 of the OFT, the 失敗 leaves thousands of bank 顧客s 激しく disappointed.

商売／仕事s and 消費者s deserve better than this. The 保守的なs have 約束d that if they 勝利，勝つ 力／強力にする there will be a shake-up of 財政上の 規則 that could encompass the OFT.

配列し直すing the furniture may work, but it seems that what is 欠如（する）ing in some ４半期/4分の1s is plain humility and competence.

Asked what would be the big event of 2010, one professional 株 仲買人 I spoke to replied: 'It will be whatever we do not 推定する／予想する.'

This is doubtless true, but even I am going to hazard a guess that one of the market-moving events of the coming 12 months will be a panic about 君主 負債 (or, as most of us call it, 政府 borrowing).

Britain's 負債 will 必然的に be a big 問題／発行する because of the General 選挙, but the UK is not alone in its indebtedness. Other countries 借りがある even more. The 簡潔な／要約する panics that surrounded Dubai and Greece in the past few weeks might be just the 早期に 調印するs of a bigger 危機 to come.

I would wager that at some point in the next year there will be an even worse 演劇 about some country or another going 破産した／（警察が）手入れする, which in turn will send shockwaves through world markets.

So which 政府 will it be? Greece again? Another 湾 明言する／公表する? What about California? The US 明言する／公表する has enormous 負債s and if it were a country it would be the tenth-largest economy in the world. Credit markets 率 it as one of the riskiest debtors の中で 政府 団体／死体s, わずかに worse than Croatia, Bulgaria or カザフ共和国.

The US 政府 would doubtless feel 強いるd to rise to California's 救助（する）, but the 列／漕ぐ／騒動s and the market panic 伴う／関わるd would be a sight to behold.

So maybe California. Maybe not. On balance it is probably best not to try to guess where the next 危機 will be, other than to say it will probably be somewhere we least 推定する／予想する.