FOR nearly two decades Britain’s monetary policy has been independently set by the Bank of England, according to targets defined by the government. Removing direct control of interest rates from politicians, who were inclined to fiddle with them for electoral gain, has made for a better-run, more stable economy in Britain, as it has in many other countries.

Yet one of the aftershocks of the Brexit earthquake in June is that the Bank of England’s independence has been called into question. There has been a growing chorus of criticism of the central bank, with increasingly senior pro-Brexit politicians calling for the government to boot out its governor and take back control of monetary policy. Such a course remains unlikely, for now. But the rhetoric is dangerous. The people chipping away at one of the remaining pillars of Britain’s financial stability should lay off.

From the people who brought you Brexit

The feistiest criticism has come from overexcited Tory backbenchers, giddy from their referendum victory over “experts”, among whom they include Mark Carney, the bank’s governor. They were infuriated by his willingness during the campaign to spell out the economic risks of Brexit, which they said compromised the bank’s political neutrality. They are now echoed by more influential figures. Michael Gove, a recently sacked cabinet minister, advised the “arrogant” Mr Carney to “ponder the fate of the Chinese emperors, overwhelmed by forces they could not control”. William Hague, a former Tory leader, threatened that if central bankers in Britain and elsewhere did not soon raise interest rates, “the era of their much-vaunted independence will come…to its end.” Most worryingly, the prime minister, Theresa May, warned in a clumsily worded speech that the bank’s regime of low interest rates and quantitative easing (printing money to buy government bonds) had penalised the poor, vowing: “A change has got to come. And we are going to deliver it.”

Enough. This newspaper has been ready to criticise the bank when it errs, as it did in its handling of the financial crisis of 2007. There is, rightly, a lively public debate about the policies of central banks, from America’s Federal Reserve to the European Central Bank. Yet the present onslaught on the Bank of England is an attack not just on its policies but on its political neutrality and independence, which for 19 years have helped underpin Britain’s status as a haven of relative stability.

This is a particularly dangerous time to launch such an attack. Sterling’s loss of nearly a fifth of its value since the referendum shows how Britain has already been devalued in the eyes of the world. The City of London risks losing some, and perhaps a lot, of the financial-services business that has powered Britain’s growth and provides a big chunk of its taxes (see article). And investors can hardly look to the opposition for reassurance: Labour has sent mixed signals, proposing a distinctly non-independent-sounding “people’s quantitative easing” and promising to review the Bank of England’s role.

None of this makes anyone keener to invest in Britain. It may well make Mr Carney more likely to jump ship (as a Canadian migrant he is, after all, a “citizen of nowhere”, to use Mrs May’s ill-judged slur on high-flying globetrotters). A few sensible types, including Philip Hammond, the chancellor, seem to realise that Britain does not need further shocks to its financial stability, and are trying to play down the row. He and Mrs May must now speak out above the din, saying loud and clear that the Bank of England’s independence is beyond question. Having opted to leave the EU after a campaign that urged voters to ignore “experts”, Britain needs all the expertise it can get.