Banking

Fasten your seatbelts…

It has, to paraphrase Margo Channing, already been a bumpy night — and it’s only going to get bumpier today. The latest news is how the Asian markets have trembled at what’s happening in the West. Japan’s main stock index is down 3.7 per cent. Australia’s is down 4.2 per cent. Hong Kong’s 5.3 per cent. And even oil futures joined in with the collective nosedive, which is continuing as the European exchanges open this morning. All of which adds to the catalogue of horror that was written yesterday. CoffeeHousers will read plenty of grim comparisons in the papers today, not least that yesterday’s plunge in the Dow Jones was

Osborne to sell off the Rock

George Osborne will use his Mansion House speech tonight to, in the words of one source, “fire the starting gun” on the sale of Northern Rock.   Robert Peston, who had the story first, reports that “The chancellor hopes that the sale of Northern Rock will send a powerful signal that the banking industry is on a path back to more normal conditions, following the crisis of three years ago.”   In an attempt to maximise return for the taxpayer, the whole of the “good bank” part of Northern Rock will be sold off to a single bidder. This means that the whole issue of discounted bank shares, which splits

Why the Vickers Review won’t harm the City’s global competitiveness

The headline measure in the Vickers Review—the need for a ring fence between retail and investment banking—should not harm the City’s global competitiveness as it only applies to banks with a UK retail operation. For everyone else, Vickers would leave London as a relatively good place to do business: far more certain than Hong Kong and less restrictive than New York once the new Dodd-Frank regulations are in place. In Conservatives circles tonight, there is a quiet confidence that the government will be able to accept the Vickers Review in full when it reports in the autumn. Given that the bill to scrap the disastrous tripartite regulatory system is currently

Clearing up after the storm

The recession has made Britain’s banks less competitive and they should be broken up, concludes the Treasury Select Committee. As the banking system spiralled towards oblivion in 2008, the market became more concentrated. ‘The financial crisis has resulted in significant consolidation of the UK retail market. Well known firms such as HBOS, Alliance & Leicester and Bradford and Bingley have either exited the market or merged with rival firms. A large number of building societies have merged, undermining the diversity of provision in the sector. Whilst these ‘rescues’ were necessary in order to preserve financial stability, the consequence has been to reduce competition and choice in the market.’ Each merger

On the whole, a qualified positive

To be sure, there was some good stuff in the budget, and I probably feel more positive about it than I expected to. The additional 1 percent cut in corporation tax, above and beyond what had already been announced, was perhaps the high point, although it will be the 1p cut in fuel duty (replacing a planned 5p rise) that draws the most favourable headlines. The rise in the personal allowance, meanwhile, is something the Adam Smith Institute has advocated for a (very) long time. Still, there were, as always, downsides. The goal to make UK corporation tax the most competitive in the G7 is a laudable one, and the

Going for growth

The government says it has a growth strategy. Speaking to the Confederation of British Industry’s annual conference last October, the prime minister said his government would adopt a “forensic, relentless focus on growth” in the coming years. The strategy has three elements: creating a framework for enterprise and business investment; directing resources into areas where Britain has a competitive advantage – such as wind technology; and making it easier for new companies and innovations to flourish. But for all this and the denunciation of Gordon Brown’s legacy, the coalition still seems to be reading from a core part of Labour’s pre-crisis script: businesses are spoken of primarily as agents for

Bad banking

No wonder the banks like Britain’s corporation tax regime. This morning’s newspapers all tell that Barclays paid just £113m in corporation tax in 2009, despite making profits of more than £11bn. In a rare instance of justified anger, Labour’s chosen men have launched an attack on the government’s failure to ‘take the robust action needed to make sure that the banks which caused the crash pay their fair share, and will stick in the stomachs of small businesses struggling to borrow and ordinary people feeling the pinch of the government’s austerity measures.’ Whatever the absurdities of Labour’s position, this news will ‘stick in the stomachs’ of the little people, whose

The coming coalition compromise on the banks

One of the questions that most fascinates Westminster is what would make Vince Cable walk out of the coalition Cabinet. Cable might be a diminished figure and have lost standing on the Lib Dem left by pushing through the tuition fees hike, but his departure would still shift the tectonic plates of politics. As James Kirkup blogs today, banking reform, or the lack thereof, is the most likely cause of Cable going nuclear. Cable is a firm believer that retail and investment banking need to be separated, a view that he pretty much reiterated on Marr this morning. Osborne and the Treasury are far more cautious on this front. Everyone

Rooting out the cause of the crisis

David Frum is doing a great series on the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission report. The report is, obviously, US-centric but its argument that the problem was not with the regulation but the regulators strikes me as highly important: “[W]e do not accept the view that regulators lacked the power to protect the financial system. They had ample power in many arenas and they chose not to use it. To give just three examples: the Securities and Exchange Commission could have required more capital and halted risky practices at the big investment banks. It did not. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York and other regulators could have clamped down on

The crash from an Austrian perspective

It’s not all politics at Westminster. There’s a pretty good think-tank scene too, with lectures on topics that you’re unlikely to read about in the newspapers. One took place today: the Adam Smith Institute hosted a lecture by Steven G. Horwitz, from St. Lawrence University, entitled “An Austrian perspective on the great recession of 2008-09”. As many CoffeeHousers will know, “Austrian” refers to von Mises, Hayek and the others whose analysis of bubbles and crises certainly seems to fit current events. My colleague Jonathan Jones was there, and took some notes – which I have moulded into a six-point briefing.  It’s not often we do a post based on a

The Guardian’s Wiki-spin

In today’s Wikileaks revelations, it is Mervyn King’s turn to be pushed through the mill. Did he act politically when pushing for a deficit reduction plan? Was he critical of David Cameron and George Osborne or just pointing out the obvious: that the Tory leaders had not held power before and – shock horror – were keen to get elected? The Guardian’s reading of the cables suggests that the government’s Batman and Robin (to keep with US diplomatic style) were unprepared for the task ahead. But re-read the key passages and it is clear that Cameron and Osborne were no different from any other opposition leaders – reliant on a

Iberian blues

I’m finishing a two-day trip to Spain and am about to board a plane, just as the bond markets turn their attention to the Iberian Peninsula. As James wrote yesterday, the gap between Spanish 10-year government bonds and those of Germany has widened to as much as 2.59 percentage points – the biggest gap since the introduction of the euro. For its part, the Portuguese government said it was under no pressure from the European Central Bank or other Eurozone member-states to accept financial aid to ease its debt and deficit problems. That sounds like the noise before the defeat. Portugal was brought to a halt yesterday by a strike

Why Spain matters to Britain

So far Ireland and Greece have been bailed out with relative ease. If Portugal required external assistance, Europe could run to that too. But bailing out Spain would be another matter entirely. As The New York Times points out today, the Spanish economy is twice as big as the Irish, Greek and Portuguese ones combined. Spain’s situation is not yet critical. But as the NYT piece sets out very clearly, there are some extremely worrying signs. The gap between Spanish and German gilt yields is now at the biggest point it has been since the introduction of the euro. Spanish banks are also heavily exposed to Portuguese debt. Compounding these

Ireland’s crisis is the fault of Fianna Fáil, not just the euro

In all likelihood, George Osborne will rise this afternoon to groans if not jeers. Britain looks set to lend Ireland £7bn as part of multilateral and bilateral bailouts. Many, particularly the Eurosceptic right, question our involvement, given our straitened financial circumstances and the apparent fact that Britain is sustaining the eurozone’s monetary and debt union, and will have to borrow to do so.     George Osborne has been adamant throughout: Ireland is too important to Britain’s recovery to risk collapse – British and Irish banks are closely linked, debts and borrowing are often co-dependent, trade is very profitable. That the bailout should strengthen the euro is a natural consequence of Ireland

Ireland’s nightmare becomes Europe’s problem

“We certainly haven’t looked to Europe.” That was the message spilling from the mouths of Irish Cabinet ministers last night – but, as Alex suggested in a superb post on the matter this morning, their utterances may come to naught. After all, Europe has certainly looked to Ireland – and it doesn’t like what it sees. Already, Brussels’ moneymen are urging a bailout on the country, and Ireland’s moneymen are thought to be in “technical discussions” about how that might work. The upshot is that a financial intervention from Europe is now considerably more likely than not. And with that come European demands over how Ireland should manage its public

G-20 in Seoul: Beyond “Camerkelism”

David Cameron is now in Seoul for the first G-20 summit hosted by a non–G-7 member state. It will be the Prime Minister’s second G-20. But things have changed dramatically since he came to power and had to jet to Toronto for his multilateral baptism. Then the Prime Minister’s arguments for austerity measures were theoretical – and a minority position. Now, they are real and have become the majority view. “Camerkelism”, the idea that short-term fiscal consolidation will induce sufficient private-sector activity to more than fully offset the fiscal drag seems to be in the ascendant. Yet the forced smiles at the traditional G-20 class photo will belie a number

Apocalypse soon

Writing in the Irish Times, Morgan Kelly has denigrated the Irish government’s handling of the economy. Comparisons are often counter-factual – Irish politics is not divided along lines of left and right, and the Celtic Tiger was made of tissue paper. But, to English readers – servicing a colossal national debt with their punitive tax bills, facing crumbling house prices, waiting for the moment when mortgages become beyond the reach of all but the cash rich, and encumbered with billions in worthless global bank assets – it is a truly terrifying read. I urge CoffeeHousers’ to read the whole piece, but here is its essence: ‘By next year Ireland will

Why the Tories didn’t win

Courtesy of John Rentoul, Tim Bale, professor of politics at the University of Sussex, offers this appraisal of the 2010 election: ‘For all the talk in opposition of decontaminating the Tory brand, of making the party more tolerant and inclusive and less ‘nasty’, the key task facing Cameron when he took over in late 2005 was reassuring voters that the Conservatives could be trusted on welfare and public services.  All the market research suggested that this was the sine qua non — a necessary if not a sufficient condition — of a return to office. When the global financial crisis hit and Britain’s budget deficit ballooned, however, this task remained

Bonuses: a question of political economy

There is a reason why the coalition has used the Lib Dem conference to step up its rhetoric about the bankers and their bonuses. The coalition believes, rightly, that balancing the budget is a matter of political economy. It is acutely aware, and has been for some time, that the sight of banks paying out huge bonuses later this year just as the public sector begins to lay people off and cut services would be disastrous. This view is shared by everyone in the coalition from Cable to Osborne. Bumper bonuses would increase calls for new punitive measures against the banks and produce precisely the kind of political atmosphere that

Cable shows his true colours

‘[Capitalism] takes no prisoners and it kills competition where it can’. ‘Markets are often irrational or rigged.’ A snob would describe those as the ravings of a chippy provincial university lecturer. In fact, they are the considered thoughts of Vince Cable, the business secretary, the very man tasked with selling Britain to international markets. Cable will address the Lib Dem conference later today, vowing to shine the ‘harsh light into the murky world corporate behaviour’. Limiting short-term speculation when linked to high pay is government policy, but Cable will go further than a spot of banker bashing. Much further. He will say: ‘Why should good companies be destroyed by short-term investors looking