HMG Risk Planning - Or Lack of It

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by pombsen-armchair-warrior, Oct 8, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. This morning, whilst listening to Cyclops latest plan to rescue UK Plc from financial meltdown, (and simultaneously surveying the wreckage of my investments and threat to my savings) I set to thinking about why we apparently were not prepared to deal with this threat to our financial infrastructure.

    Surely it was a risk that must have been assessed by HMG, even if the likelihood of risk crystallisation was low and, with this comforting thought in mind, I sought out and examined the UK Risk Register (last updated on 8 Aug 08).

    You will probably have guessed the rest - the risk was ignored, quite possibly because it was outwith the intellect of HMGs finest to even attempt to put in place a basic framework, and there is no strategy for dealing with it, apart from that old fall-back, namely policy made on the hoof.

    For those interested in seeing what else HMG has failed to plan for, I have included the link the link to the register.


    http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/~/media/assets/www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/publications/reports/national_risk_register/national_risk_register%20pdf.ashx
     
  2. Fair call, but you should note that this is a sanitised version of the actual document. This is designed to show people what is being done, without causing too much panic ;-)
     
  3. The other factor to look at is the private vs public sector.
    the risk register covers the "public" sector risk traditionally seen as the Government's Civil defence job.

    Finance is seen as a private sector centric activity, where government involvement is seldom welcomed.

    Control used to be exerted from the Government via the Bank of England which in a rising market came in for criticism as the Bank of England didn't react quickly enough and there was a concern for non experts/Politicians being at the helm of something important.
    Enter the independant Bank of England that made decisions on its own, improved response to markets etc etc. Along comes a Black Swan event no one prepared for and kaboom.

    Bear in mind regulatory controls that could have prevented this would have been seen as "uncompetitive" and "restrictive".

    Put it like this. If an airline security expert had forced through armoured cockpit doors for all commercial airliners pre Sept 11, he would have been reviled for imposing greater cost on transport and unneccessarily damaging " the feedom of the skies".
    He would not be thanked for saving 2000+ lives as that sort of claim would have been dismissed by the industry as "alarmist, speculative and unrealistic".

    Same applies for financial crises.