Of 61 things brought to the FSA board’s attention in 2006 and 2007, only one involved banking supervision. As Sir David Walker told the Treasury select committee this morning, the other matters involved Treating Customers Fairly, Equitable Life, pensions misselling and other conduct issues.

But isn’t that the board’s fault? It is their organisation, it should be their agenda,  and they were repeatedly told by me, among many, many others, that they were in serious danger of neglecting big institutions  in their obsession with small ones. At a minimum, a very minimum, they should have examined lending practices and securitisation.

They needed to address issues about conduct of course particularly when it involved cleaning up after pension misselling and Equitable.

But this reads like they were ‘fighting the last war’ and any organisation worth its salt should know not to do that alone. Meanwhile what was the wholesale division up to in the midst of this – saying things were all tickety boo?

Walker thinks this exonerates the board from a lot of the blame for the banking disaster. No it does not.

The Money Debate can keep this short and sweet and give its view in three points.

1) Stephen Gay should really have stayed at Aifa at least until the RDR deadline.

2) The ABI really should not have poached or hired (or whatever they want to call it) the boss of Aifa at this point in the process (even if it is the football transfer window).

3) The Money Debate humbly submits that someone within the organisation should step up and take the role in an acting capacity until at least year end – i.e. if at all possible Rob Sinclair. Or are we going to muck about for the next six months instead?