James Moore: Only way forward is to pay the whistle-blowers
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Outlook Part of the Parliamentary Commission on Banking's report dealt with whistle-blowers. We've seen Acts of Parliament, allegedly designed to assist them, and the report calls for their protection in banks to be made the responsibility of the group chairman. The trouble is, it won't work.
The history of whistle-blowing in this country suggests that it is they who will find themselves being brought to book rather than those responsible for the bad practice they seek to expose.
In taking action whistle-blowers put at risk not just their career progression but their very careers, and perhaps worse, given the backlash that will almost certainly emanate from those exposed.
The safer option is to turn a blind eye to what is going on, even if your employer requires that you highlight bad practice where you see it. Violating the departmental omerta is not an easy thing to do and, even if your job is protected, you might very soon find yourself taking redundancy because of the sheer unpleasantness of having to walk into a place where nobody talks to you day in, day out.
There is a way around this, of course. That is to pay the whistleblower. So far regulators have fought shy of taking this step, fearing moral hazard.
The spectre of making millionaires of those who expose malpractice, as has happened in the US, is an uncomfortable one. However, the best reassurance of protection is not the word of the chairman. It is that of financial recompense so the whistle-blower knows there is something to fall back on if it all goes wrong after they've opened the chicken coup.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments