I wrote recently that had I money invested in the Northern Rock I would be the first in the queue to get it out. I stand by that position. However, I have never had any money invested in this institution. I still think anyone that has should move it straight away and not rely on the Government statement that they would be covered for their full investment, irrespective of what happens in the future to the bank.

Today we learned that the CEO was to resign with immediate effect together with 7 non-executive directors following suit. Adam Applegarth however, stays on till next year to supervise the next 'phase' in the bank's plans 'which may include a sale' as per the statement released today.

Two names stand out from the non-exec list: Sir Derek Wanless and Nichola Pease, 'city slickers' past and present respectively. Wanless has a string of directorships to his name and was once the Group CEO to National Westminster Bank till his retirement in 1999. He also is mandated by the current Labour Government to oversee a review of the National Health Service.

Ms Pease is a director and substantial shareholder of Odey Asset Management, a city-based Hedge Fund where her husband is also CEO.

So I was wondering with all this heavyweight city experience on the board of Northern Rock, did it ever get into so much trouble as it is experiencing today. Allegedly now borrowing 25 billion pounds sterling from the taxpayer's purse, via the Bank of England and the Treasury, it is surprising that the 'Rock' did not have a better handle on the risk they were surrounding themselves in.

It is standard practice in financial institutions to have risk assessed on at least a monthly basis, together with exposure risk being assessed on a daily basis given market conditions.

A question to ask is were the non-executive directors and the above two in particular, involved in the risk assessment process and did either of them at any time raise an alarm about the way the bank was raising short-term money to fund long-term customer borrowing?

Neither resigned on the day Northern Rock announced the problems it faced. Neither have to my understanding raised public concern about the risk model employed by the bank.

In addition Wanless has a potential conflict of interest since he is chairing the National Health Service review on behalf of HM Government and at the same time being involved in the Northern Rock, that is now indebted to HM Government.

I detest these 'jobs for the boys and girls' at the best of times irrespective of the experience that candidates might bring to any office or non-exec position.

Non-Executives also have a duty to the shareholders to see that the business is run correctly. Clearly this has not been done in the case of Northern Rock.

Questions must be asked of the non-executives as well as the operating board and Mr Applegarth in particular. Many of the shareholders will be staff and former staff, the pension fund and other pension funds. Many staff will be in the process of saving through bonus towards share schemes, etc.

I repeat my previous statement that the courts will be occupied for a few months, even years yet, on the debacle that is the fall of Northern Rock mortgage bank (deceased). The whole board remain culpable.

Added: Saturday 09.00 am

The Observer has noted today that:

'...Northern Rock’s accountant PricewaterhouseCoopers is facing accusations of a damaging conflict of interest after it emerged that it earned bigger fees for helping the crisis-hit lender to sell on its loans, and borrow funds in the wholesale markets, than for auditing the business.

The bank’s annual report reveals that PwC was paid £500,000 in 2006 for auditing and £700,000 in ‘non-audit fees’, specifically ‘in respect of securitisation transactions and the raising of wholesale funding...’

This plot thicken on stirring since one of the other retiring non-execs, Rosemary Radcliffe, is a former chief economist at PwC.

I just can't wait for the movie....