{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.009907997169143666, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.121212121212121, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Why the Transfer of Bank Supervisory Powers Back to the Bank of England is a Step in the Right Direction: Revisiting the Role of External Auditors in Bank and Financial Services Supervision

The need for effective supervision of capital markets is becoming all the more evident in the aftermath of the recent LIBOR and rate rigging scandals. Financial regulators or indeed bank regulators cannot perform such a function effectively without the involvement of auditors in the supervisory process. A challenging task awaits the incoming Bank of England Governor, Mark Carney – particularly given the reduced involvement of auditors in the bank supervisory process since the time of assumption of the Financial Services Authority's bank supervisory functions. However, he (as well as other recent financial reforms) may prove to be the much needed boost required in the bank and indeed, financial supervisory process. This paper is aimed at highlighting why the transfer of bank supervision back to the Bank of England is required if further progress is to be made in the effective regulation and supervision of the financial services sector. It also highlights shortcomings which exist and need to be addressed if the Bank of England is to perform its tasks efficiently as well as regain the momentum and advantages it had acquired before its supervisory powers were transferred to the Financial Services Authority.