Skip to main content

Latest on the banks

 The Government's policy on the banks is incoherent. It is desperately
 trying to avoid calling what has happened by its true name:
 nationalisation. We in the Green Party believe that the banks that are
 owned or part-owned by us, the public -- this nation -- ought to be
 controlled accordingly. 'No taxation without representation' ought to
 be the motto: Our tax-money has baled out these institutions; the least
 that we should ask in return is for our needs and values directly to
 guide their lending policies.
 It is time that the Government started to take a serious role in
 controlling the banks that it owns. It is quite absurd -- it is a grave
 danger to the prospects of stabilising our economy and avoiding
 Depression -- to have some banks hoarding money and refusing to lend and
 profiteering through maintaining high interest rates, even after the
 Bank of England has cut its rate by such an unprecedented amount. LIBOR
 should come down - the Government should make it so.
 Now, it is true that the banks ought not to be lending money lightly to bad credit risks --
 that, after all, is what got us into this trouble in the first place.
 But when they do lend, they ought to lend at low interest, to
 facilitate economic activity that can prevent a Depression. It is way
 past time now for the Government simply and legally to _insist_ that the banks that it funds
 should do this: if they expect to continue to receive any Government
 support.

Comments

Joe Otten said…
Surely to profiteer you would have to lend at high interest rates, not hoard money at high interest rates.

Yes, the banks all deserve a good kicking, but lets not imagine that state-controlled banking is a viable long term solution. Time and again political pressure to lend according to political objectives has landed state banks with mountains of bad debt.

Popular posts from this blog

More on why 20's plenty -- without need for any further 'trials'...

There are a number of reasons for setting a default speed of 20mph throughout the 'unclassified' road network in residential parts of a city such as Norwich. Most important perhaps is that of driver recognition as to what the speed limit is. If you have 20 mph as the default then you not only establish this limit clearly, but you also adjust the driver's recognition as to what is the "normal" speed in such residential areas. The most important aspect is that drivers set 20 mph as the norm with those 30 mph areas or roads being seen as 50% faster, rather than seeing 30 mph as the norm with 20 mph as 33% slower. The psychological adjustment of normal speeds in residential areas is key to the success of reducing speeds and therefore danger to pedestrians and cyclists. Therefore any trial, pilot or whatever, that only implements 20 mph in a tiny proportion of the city is not modelling 20's Plenty in any realistic manner.   When considering the val...

Stansted: a reflection

The key question, in relation to protsts like that at Stansted last week, is: which side are you on? Are you on the side of big corporations profiteering from completely unsustainable climate-destructive behaviour? Or are you on the side of people with no vested interests just making a non-violent stand, at considerable cost to their own time and money, for the sake of all our futures? It doesn't seem to me a hard judgement to make... Rupert Read Green Party Councillor, Norwich, and Lead Candidate for Eastern Region for the Greens in the 2009 Euro-elections. DID YOU KNOW: A vote of about 10% across Eastern Region on June 4 2009 would be enough to get me elected to the European Parliament... http://rupertsread.blogspot.com