Something for the BBC to chew over should they get around to discussing the causes of the financial crash.
Andrew Bailey (in the Paywalled Sunday Times), deputy governor for prudential regulation at the Bank of England, said:
‘The crises that lead to such big changes often follow long upswings in economic and financial conditions that are allowed to go to excess. Light touch regulation in the run-up to the start of the financial crisis in 2007 supported expansionary growth in the balance sheets of banks – which was literally too good to be true.
Two important principles stand out for me: first that we must carry out financial regulation with an eye on conditions in the real economy…and second we should always be prepared to look to risks ahead, and exercise sensible judgement.’
A pretty damning assessment of Gordon Brown’s policies.
Strange that whenever a Tory politician raises the matter of Labour blame he is told that that is old history….the Coalition has been in government for three years…the hamstrung economy is now purely their fault.
The Left still blame Margaret Thatcher (as was so amply proven last month) so I am intending to be blaming Blair and Brown until 2040 at least.
Unfortunately, you may well have to!
At least there would be much truth in blaming BlairBrown, in contrast to Maggie’s mainly positive contribution.
“Light touch regulation in the run-up to the start of the financial crisis in 2007 supported expansionary growth in the balance sheets of banks……..”. It may, in Alan’s view, be a “pretty damning assessment of Gordon Brown’s policies” but it conveniently ignores that both Cameron and Osborne were in favour of even lighter regulation.
Also conveniently ignored is the scale of the banking crisis – is Brown to be held responsible for the same thing happening in other countries?
Cameron and Osborne may have been in favour as you say, I obviously do not know them as well as you do to read their minds. But one thing I do know, neither of them were in government at the time, so they could have been in favour of anything but it wouldn’t have made a blind bit of difference to what actually happened.
The blame lies fair and square on the Labour Government of the day – so accept it; and don’t make yourself look childish by trying to reassign the blame. with the ‘yes but’ game.
No need to read their minds – it is a matter of record!!
Out of curiosity, where does this “record” actually reside?
In Albaman’s wishful imagination.
Hansard, part manifestos.
Good place to start.
Have you any links?
“…but it conveniently ignores that both Cameron and Osborne were in favour of even lighter regulation.”
Even lighter effective regulation. The ‘tripartite’ BoE+FSA+HMT was not effective and Peter Lilley had warned in 1997 of the exact thing that happened in the ‘credit crunch’.
Also conveniently ignored is the scale of the banking crisis – is Brown to be held responsible for the same thing happening in other countries?
Much of what happened elsewhere has its root in what the US and UK were doing and can be traced back to Brown (see first sentence in this reply) and Clinton (repeal of Glass-Steagall. Later GWB did try for tighter controls over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac but too little too late).
Less can be more if it is the right kind!
“Less can be more if it is the right kind!
Absolutely. The same can be applied to most government policies, especially immigration.
“is Brown to be held responsible for the same thing happening in other countries? “
No, just for the mess in this one. Asked and answered.
No disputing that albaman.
Yet it was “Labor wot dun it”…so THEY are totally responsible for the mess that we are in.
That the Tories would have been no better is not the point-Ken Clarke/John Major left Blair a decent working economy-and it was Labour that decoupled the Bank of England from the Treasury, it was Labour that sold off the gold reserves, it was Labour that pissed all our money over schools and the hospitals, thinking that the magic tree would bear fruit for ever…need I go on?
Labour f***ed up a perfectly functioning economy, drove it into the wall, took the keys, left it burning, pour petrol on the firemen…and sneer that the Tories caused it.
Just because the BBC say-doesn`t mean that anybody needs to believe it.
Brown is to blame. Which is why we don`t hear from him anymore…OK?
No, only for his mishandling of UK banks. Which banks collapsed first, Scottish/English banks or banks elsewhere?
Brown’s handling was not only light, it was negligent. The boys, literally, from the FSA did not understand the products traded by their subject banks.
All the legislation in the world is useless if the people who are selected to manage organisations such as banks, central banks, regulators, government, lawmakers, law enforcers, journalists etc. are inherently incapable or unwilling to curtail their amoral, immoral and criminal tendencies; to do the job for which they are paid, without fear or favour and to conduct themselves according to generally accepted notions of civilised and honest behaviour. So, what we need to return to (if there ever was such a time) and relearn is how we train and select our leaders so that they are paragons of virtue; do that and the law won’t be needed.
Well said, exactly.
Brown came to power in 1997 and imposed his socialist agenda. He systematically set about destroying Britain’s private pensions and savings, encouraging everyone to borrow, take 25-year (or longer) mortgages to pay for a holiday or car, get loans to buy houses at inflated prices without arranging to pay off the capital, no consequences of going bankrupt, depend on the state for everything. Unfortunately he took his own advice and for the next decade the Labour government borrowed more than we could afford just to pay for his popularity.
Not surprisingly, the pack of cards eventually collapsed. But you won’t find any of this on the bBBC which has airbrushed Brown’s profligacy out of their history.
Brown is a liar and a thief. No more need be said by anyone including the BBC, who are no increasingly using him as a scape goat, if a guilty man can be a scapegoat, to try and deflect the blame for the mess from Labour as a whole. But whilst Brown was the chief culprit on all matters financial , welfare and expansion of the public sector, I suspect that the wolf in sheep’s clothing , Blair, was the chief architect of mass immigration.
What’s this got to do with the BBC? May as well talk about the weather or Wigan’s chances in the cup. Or maybe some silence.
‘Or maybe some silence.’
Looking who has been clogging the ether posting irony-free drive-by counters or self-appointed hallway monitor whinges all day while most have been enjoying the sun… that was an aspiration dead on utterance.
You`re obtuse aren`t you?
Listen to the Reunion today…all the major players were there.
Except Alistair Campbell…the man who killed David Kelly as much as anybody.
Yet the BBC serialise his diaries, pay him to show up on their programmes…and allow him(of course) not to answer for what he did re the sexed up dossier.
The BBCs bias towards the NuLabor war criminals is evident in all that they say and do.
THAT is what it has to do with our publicly funded, monopoly of a left liberal stitch up of a BBC…only you could not see the pattern.
Not liking Alastair Campbell doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be heard on TV & Radio. And that doesn’t equate to bias.
Given that episode between Campbell & the BBC, isn’t it a demonstration of impartiality that he continues to appear on the BBC? And too often for some.
Same as David Vance I suppose. But best we continue to ignore that eh?
Hello Nicked Emus. Were you also “A Journalist” on the other thread as well as the other longer name which amounted to “You’re not British and you don’t have a right to an opinion”?
Anyway Nicodemus old son, I named you and I claim my £5.