Interesting emphasis in news reports of the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) inquiry into Tesco's accounts for 2012, 2013 and 2014:
"The FRC's investigation will include business services giant PwC's auditing and preparation of Tesco's accounts. PwC remains as Tesco's auditor."
As discussed on these pages several times, PwC, along with others of the Big Four accountants, are among the great untouchables of the business universe, and have largely managed to escape any serious flak in the great UK financial services meltdown. The FRC, like the rest of the regulatory system, will not be without potential conflicts of interest as no-one who obtains a senior position in these new watchdog bodies is likely to have done so without some past association with these financial behemoths; indeed half of the FRC's board have been employed by them.
So press releases emphasising that PwC is under the microscope are perhaps a sign of interesting things to come in 2015.
Talking of enforced atonement, this was the week when RBS announced an update on its "robust and widespread accountability review", the contemporary jargon for a witch hunt. It is being led by Jon Pain, a splendid name for RBS's witchfinder general, sorry, "head of conduct and regulatory affairs". The conduct of more than 50 current and former traders has been in the frame, and, "so far, six employees have been placed into a disciplinary process, three of whom are currently suspended, pending continuing investigations".
Pain makes the interesting comment: "We are undertaking a robust and thorough review into the actions of the traders that caused this wrongdoing and the management that oversaw it."
Why interesting? Because Agenda has picked up mutters that there might be scapegoating of juniors, and the "management" mention sounds like a hint this will not be permitted. Subsequent employment tribunals will be as interesting as Pain's findings, which are due in the first quarter of 2015.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article