As the cuts bite and growth stagnates, who will challenge our reckless bankers?
In the absence of major re-regulation our financial system remains dangerously dysfunctional.
By Ann Pettifor Published 05 February 2012 19:52
Source: Getty Images
The humiliation of Fred Goodwin may have appeased a public baying for vengeance, but has done little to fix the broken global banking system or reverse the Second Great Depression. But then the public have been given very little leadership as to how to address the causes of this crisis. Politicians, economists, central bankers and think-tanks have both created an almighty mess, but also sown confusion as to the true reasons for catastrophic economic failure. Instead the public have deliberately been blind-sided, distracted into focussing on a) the public sector and b) a consequence of the crisis: the public finances.
Fred Goodwin's hounding shows that while you can fool the people some of the time, you can't do so all of the time. Nevertheless, stripping Goodwin of his knighthood does not fix the banking system, or help the economy recover.
Last week Jonathan Portes of the NIESR helped subvert some of the propaganda by boldly speaking truth to power. To the consternation of many he showed that the ongoing slump is now longer and deeper than the slump of the 1930s. While the players in stock markets remain unmoved by this truth, it unnerved the establishment and all those who insist on a disastrous form of economic bloodletting: austerity. These economic 'quacks' include MPs in all three major political parties; their friends in the City, the press and economics profession - and not forgetting those at the Institute for Fiscal Studies. Only a year ago the IFS followed the herd and urged the Coalition not to soften its stance on austerity. Now as contraction crushes the life out of the economy, hurts the poor and families with children, the IFS makes a mealy-mouthed appeal for "a significant short-term fiscal stimulus". That IFS economists are not embarrassed by the contradictions and absurdity of their analysis is disturbing. That they remain unchallenged can only be explained by the sustained ideological drum-beat that drowns out sound economic analysis.
The Bank of England helped silence some of this propaganda when it issued figures last week which show, unsurprisingly, that neither austerity nor massive taxpayer bailouts have restored the British banking system to solvency. In the absence of major re-regulation, it remains dangerously dysfunctional.
Banking systems exist to lend money into the economy. Not so today's. British banks are so over-leveraged (i.e. insolvent) that they cannot fulfil their role as lenders. Instead of acting as a lending machine, the British banking system, bizarrely, is now a borrowing machine. Like giant vacuum cleaners, banks are hoovering up the nation's public and private resources, while refusing to lend, except at high rates.
The BoE data shows that banks siphoned up £11bn more from the real economy than they lent to firms last year. And to compound the damage, bankers borrowed from the nationalised Bank of England at rock-bottom rates, and then lent to firms at high and rising, real rates of interest. This helps explain the ongoing slump that characterises the Second Great Depression. Banks are charging a whopping 20% for authorised overdrafts - and rates are set to rise higher. Despite this massive spread, they are still not raking in enough to clean up their balance sheets, render banks solvent, and start lending again.
And still government and the official opposition turn a blind eye. Neither proposes to radically re-structure and re-regulate Britain's broken financial system - to subordinate arrogant bankers to their proper role in the economy, and to restore stability.
Until they do, expect many more Fred Goodwins to be bundled into media tumbrils, and hauled up on to the scaffold of public humiliation.
Ann Pettifor is director of Advocacy International
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists




















11 comments
A polemical piece that will no doubt play well to those who see the world the same way as you, but will do absolutely nothing to persuade those who do not.
So, what exactly was the point?
Whether others engage with rational debate or not, would be great if you could set an example, even on a site with a particular political perspective like this one.
Otherwise, we can all just get shriller and shriller, to no avail and to no change.
Good piece. @James is talking about himself, in denial.
'To the consternation of many he showed that the ongoing slump is now longer and deeper than the slump of the 1930s'
You really believe he showed that?
Alright, put another way- do u think the current recession is as bad as the 30's, here in UK i mean?
CUCKOO!
Here are two verses I wrote in a poem about IMF Policies (the people George Osbourne boasted approved his austerity cuts). They do seem appropriate
You can never reduce poverty
By concentrating wealth
You do not spread diseases
To protect the public health
We can start by recognising
That money in healthy economies
Like blood in a healthy body flows
And severing your arteries
Is worse than body blows
And in relation to giving people huge salaries for borrowing at 0.5% and lending at 20% it's hardly rocket science
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNp2fxdrNeA
Magpie View, don't give up the day job, fella. Your poem is incomprehensible. And very bad.
@Fergus Pickering ,
I disagree with you, the video and the lyrics are not bad.
The message is well transmitted.
When it comes to the UK's recent financial history, some kind of memory blank seems to have affected the Tories and even some Labour MPS.
We understood the FSA, not the food agency, was set up by Gordon Brown with the justification that the BoE had made a complete mess of the BICC affair, not forgetting the Johnson Matthey debacle, Black Wednesday and the ERM withdrawal.
Instead of relying on two scouts dedicated to detecting financial storms, Gordon added a third to the patrol.
Reasonable logic in the circumstances.
Three Pairs of Eyes
In previous response we got out cables in a tangle. Collapsed bank's initials - BCCI ( Bank of Credit and Commercial International).
Also overlooked the little matter of Barings! So did the BoE.
Errors and Omissions excepted!
What austerity? We are running one of the biggest deficits in Europe. Spending has increased under this Coalition government. Osborne projects to increase the national debt 60% under this parliament, and to still be running deficits at the end of it.
number one goal is capital adequacy.
the euro crisis has shown that if greece or italy default, many euro banks holding govt debt will become vulnerable including our own through contagion.