Looking back, it seems inevitable that the increasing breadth of financial activities undertaken by single firms would create an impetus for increased consolidation in the oversight of such activities. Of course this was the view in the late 1990s. At other points in time, indeed just over a decade after the FSA was created, it was decided that the most appropriate way to structure supervision was along separate prudential and conduct lines – the so-called “twin peaks” model. Moreover, some supervisory authorities like the PRA sit within the central bank given (in the case of the UK) the Bank’s longstanding interest in overseeing the banks that settle in its money – the clearing banks – out of which was born a system of supervision over banking and payment systems. 37  Gower, L.C.B. ’Review of Investor Protection’, Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Trade and Indutstry, January 1984, p.13 38 Ibid, p.25 39 Hansard: http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1997/may/20/bank-of-england-and-financial-regulation 13  All speeches are available online at www.bankofengland.co.uk/speeches  13  Beyond the UK, we can observe many different types of institutional arrangements. In the United States, the organisation of supervisory agencies reflects the federal system of government with supervisors at both central government and local state level. Another difference lies in the fact that many US state commissioners are publicly elected, unlike other countries where supervisors are unelected. Indeed, undertaking a stint as an insurance supervisor at the DTI during the 1980s was just another rotation for those enrolled on the government-wide civil service scheme.

While a college education is generally a good investment, the cost of attending a fouryear college has risen considerably faster than wages over the last several decades. This means that college has become increasingly unaffordable—which can act as a drag on economic mobility and the growth of a college-educated workforce, and by extension, on productivity growth and living standards. As has been well documented by my New York Fed colleagues, many young Americans have adjusted to rising tuition and fees by taking on more debt. This trend highlights the importance of the federal student loan program, which has helped mitigate the impact of the shift in financing of 1/2  BIS central bankers' speeches  higher education from state and local funding to students and their families over the past few decades. However, the end result is that more students leave college with significantly higher amounts of debt. Student loan debt has more than tripled over the past two decades and now totals over $ trillion. It is important to consider what these changes in financing higher education mean for economic mobility. First, New York Fed researchers have documented that a large percentage of student borrowers—especially those who attend less selective colleges or drop out—have trouble staying current on their loans, and often become delinquent and default on their debt. We also know that these factors—slow repayment, delinquency, and default—are most prevalent among those from more modest family circumstances. In addition, there is evidence that student debt acts as a drag on homeownership.