The Labourgraph might be getting a teeny bit sounder now that Jeremy Warner is on-board as assistant editor. After squillions of years at the Independent (where he was probably the least leaf-eating contributor), you'd think he'd bring along his wet ways. But not if his first column - titled 'the City doesn't need any more rules' - is anything to go by:

The FSA's failure in banking oversight is widely put down to the prevailing consensus of the time – that the operation of "light touch" regulation with a minimum of interference was good for the City, good for the economy and therefore good for tax revenues. In fact, there was never any such thing as "light touch" regulation. The establishment of the FSA led to an unprecedented flood of rules and regulations. If all that was required to protect the public from the folly of bankers was more rules, codes of conduct and statements of principle, then the FSA would have been a champion several times over.

Failure by regulators to see the risks was one thing, but by lulling everyone into a false sense of security, instructive regulation also had the perverse effect of making the financial system more irresponsible and therefore less safe.