Sorry? The guy expressed concern in 2008 - the time of the worst banking crisis since the 30s - about some banks he did not have any influence over not being transparent and about self-report data he also could not influence having integrity issues, as any self-report may have. What did you want him to do beyond that: play Samson in the temple?
The bigger question is why the markets allowed self-report data to so heavily influence them. Were they too lazy to demand hard data or, back then, did they still believe a banker's word was his bond?
It seems a pretty clear choice: "free" stuff or pay your own way. Sadly, it does not even boil down to free stuff for your lot versus free stuff for my lot. Obama bailed out big companies and banks just as eagerly as Bush did.
You've heard of "Disgusted, Tunbridge Wells"? Well, I live in Holland Park and I've Had It. Up to here! An old curmudgeon, I rant and rave about things I read, see or hear in the News. Frequently sarcastic, irreverent and libertarian; often wrong - but never uncertain.