Thursday, March 12, 2009
Big 87654, Bah Humbug
"Paul Moore's written evidence to the House of Common Treasury committee last week was a surgical strike. His recounting to the committee of his warnings to HBOS, the UK bank, that it was expanding too fast, swiftly led to the resignation of Sir James Crosby as deputy chairman of the Financial Services Authority. It was Sir James, then HBOS chief executive, who had forced Mr. Moore out of his job at the bank in 2005. Few whistleblowers enjoy such sweet revenge. ... A US study in 1989 found that 95 per cent of whistleblowers suffered reprisals. An Australian study out the figure at 94 per cent. ... Gagging orders against whistleblowers have no force under the UK's Public Interest Disclosure Act, even when they are part of out-of-court settlements. ... A previosuly unpublished review of [Moore's ] departure by KPMG accused him of 'being overly verbose and full of self-importance' and 'over-stating matters in an overly dramatic and theatrical way.' Mr. Moore's response was a laconic, 'Well, they would say that, wouldn't they'," Michael Skapinker at the FT, 17 February 2009.
Of course KPMG would say that. What was KPMG paid to say? PWC "audits" HBOS. Would KPMG say Moore found a problem PWC missed? Pigs will fly first. The Big 87654 in my experience say what they're paid to say. Doesn't KPMG "audit" Citigroup? KPMG's ad hominen attack on Moore ignored the substance of the issues he raised. My one experience working with a Big 87654 Litigation Support Department (LSD) made me conclude I was dealing with a bunch of cowardly, incompetent clerks who could not distinguish substance from form. One question to ask any Big 87654 firm LSD: how many times in the past five years did it testify against another Big 87654 firm in connection with an accounting malpractice case.