year, pbe brought together a team of volunteer economists from oxera consulting with a charity called centrepoint which does wonderful work with homeless young people in this estimate assumes just under 60 % of these volunteers are in employment, in line with the uk employment rate. dunn et al ( 2014 ). dunn et al ( 2014 ). bis central bankers ’ speeches london. 25 centrepoint were keen to evaluate quantitatively the social benefits of their work. so the oxera team sought to capture the benefits of reducing homelessness in getting young people into employment or training, preventing them from re - offending, treating their mental health issues and reducing their substance misuse. these are a subset, albeit an important subset, of the social costs of homelessness. the results of this study, which was published by pbe last year, are outlined in figure 12. to cut a long story short, the study suggested that, for every £1 spent by centrepoint, there was a societal benefit of at least £2. 40. or, put differently, centrepoint delivered a social return on investment of 140 % over a five year period. this was very much a lower bound estimate. let me give you a second example of a pbe social impact study, this time on an even grittier issue – child sexual exploitation. in 2012, a pbe team from the bank of england did a piece of work for barnardo ’ s to judge the impact of their interventions to help exploited children. 26 they looked at the reduced incidence of missing person calls to the police, the reduced probability of becoming classified as not in employment, education or training ( neet ), reductions in substance misuse and the benefits from secure accommodation. these benefits are outlined in figure 13. they suggest a higher social welfare multiplier, perhaps as large as six to twelve. this is not miles away from estimates from a recent city of london study. this found that, when a business invests £1 in employability - related employee volunteering, the social return is over £11 for society. 27 of course, the precise social multipliers are likely to vary, charity by charity. to give you some idea of scale, the lowest multiplier we have found from one of pbe ’ s studies to date is around 2. 5, while the highest runs into double - figures. and while the number of studies conducted by pbe is too small to constitute a representative sample – there are around 161, 000 uk charities 28

paul tucker : financial crisis and g20 financial regulatory reform – an overview remarks by mr paul tucker, deputy governor of the bank of england, at the financial stability board ( fsb ) and korean g20 presidential committee conference, seoul, 3 september 2010. * * * being a western financial official, one comes to asia with some humility in truth. this has been a financial crisis born and bred in the western world, but inflicted throughout the world. that makes it all the more important that korea and the other countries in asia and elsewhere in the emerging market world are involved in the reform efforts. the reforms are not simply going to be cooked up in the west where the problems were bred. in korea, you have to play a really important leadership role, especially in steering us through the next couple of months. much of the work towards the leaders summit is being handled in the financial stability board. and here is a very brief overview of what is going on in the fsb contribution to the g20 effort, under the following headings : 1 ) surveillance ; 2 ) bank capital and liquidity ; 3 ) too big to fail ; 4 ) capital markets ; 5 ) incentives ; and finally the regulatory perimeter. 1. surveillance of the system very obviously this was a crisis that was not spotted – in the most important sense of being prevented – ahead of time. people did issue warnings about developing leverage in the system and accumulating macroeconomic imbalances. but no one acted to make the financial system more resilient to those vulnerabilities. this was not just an intellectual failure, as is widely discussed and recognized now. it was also partly a failure of machinery. the fsb has been encouraging new machinery to survey and head off risks. the fsb itself has created a vulnerabilities group. it is probably the least prominent part of the financial stability board ’ s effort to date, but it could have enduring significance over the years and decades. it is paralleled in various regions. europe is setting up a systemic risk board, which will be supported by the ecb but involve all of the eu. the usa is setting up a systemic oversight council ; and in the uk, the government is establishing a macroprudential financial policy committee in the bank of england. maybe something is needed in asia, too. martin [ wolf ] talked about complacency ; for the machinery i have described to make any difference, people will have to stick to it year