green Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/mar/01/mervyn-king-blames-banks-cuts Mervyn King has risked reopening the bitter argument over blame for the financial crisis by saying that government spending cuts are the fault of the City and expressing surprise there has not been more public anger. The governor of the Bank of England said that people made unemployed and businesses bankrupted during the crisis had every reason to be resentful and voice their protest. He told the Treasury select committee that the billions spent bailing out the banks and the need for public spending cuts were the fault of the financial services sector. "The price of this financial crisis is being borne by people who absolutely did not cause it," he said. "Now is the period when the cost is being paid, I'm surprised that the degree of public anger has not been greater than it has." King has repeatedly pointed the finger at the City since the crisis erupted in 2007, but this was the first time he blamed bankers for the coalition's spending cuts. It became clear during the hearing that King and his fellow members of the Bank's monetary policy committee, which sets interest rates, believe the crisis will have a lasting impact on the economy. Asked when living standards enjoyed before the crisis would return, King said: "The research makes it clear that the impact of these crises lasts for many years. It is not like an ordinary recession, where you lose output and get it back quickly. We may not get the lost output back for very many years, if ever." King faced tough questions from Labour MPs who believe the Bank should not have supported the Treasury's cuts programme. Accused by Andy Love, the Labour MP for Edmonton, of giving George Osborne cover for spending cuts, King denied that meetings with the chancellor resulted in a cosy agreement to keep interest rates low to support austerity measures. He said: "There has never been any attempt on any occasion to influence the monetary policy committee on what decisions it should take." In a further provocation to the financial sector, King set out plans for an overhaul of City regulation and oversight that would allow banks to fail when they get into trouble. He told MPs it was necessary to move away from rules designed to prevent banks failing, with a safety net provided by taxpayers, to a system that allowed banks to fail in an orderly way. For those people who are angry, UKUncut is our only voice. Our politicians from all parties don't care. Big business and banks will contrinue to ride rough shod over us. http://www.UKUncut.org.uk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green Posted March 2, 2011 Author Share Posted March 2, 2011 We have some choices here......we can continue to hide behind our beliefs and keyboards and do nothing. Or get involved in organisations who are not putting up with this anymore. http://www.UKUncut.org.uk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vague_Boy Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Merv the Swerve is a spineless, disingenuous weasel. His response to ever increasing inflation is "vigilance". Yep, Merv's "vigilance" and 3 quid will buy you a cup of coffee at Starbucks. Interestingly, the UK was posting record deficits in 2006. Care to explain THAT Merv? He had so much confidence in his anti-inflation policies that the MPC pension fund was transferred to index linked bonds. What a <REMOVED>. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Its not just the banks to blame though, Labour wasted a shocking amount of money during their time in power - BSF, and ID cards to name just two. There was also something in the news yesterday about the massive increase in traffic light deployment. 33,000 extra sets of lights at something like a minimum of £100K per set. Or the huge cost in the setting up of the anti terror laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 We have some choices here......we can continue to hide behind our beliefs and keyboards and do nothing. Or get involved in organisations who are not putting up with this anymore. http://www.UKUncut.org.uk Stamping ones feet and saying we're not going to put up with this anymore is one thing, coming up with workable solutions to dig us out of the hole we're in is another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesday1 Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/mar/01/mervyn-king-blames-banks-cuts Mervyn King has risked reopening the bitter argument over blame for the financial crisis by saying that government spending cuts are the fault of the City and expressing surprise there has not been more public anger. The governor of the Bank of England said that people made unemployed and businesses bankrupted during the crisis had every reason to be resentful and voice their protest. He told the Treasury select committee that the billions spent bailing out the banks and the need for public spending cuts were the fault of the financial services sector. "The price of this financial crisis is being borne by people who absolutely did not cause it," he said. "Now is the period when the cost is being paid, I'm surprised that the degree of public anger has not been greater than it has." King has repeatedly pointed the finger at the City since the crisis erupted in 2007, but this was the first time he blamed bankers for the coalition's spending cuts. It became clear during the hearing that King and his fellow members of the Bank's monetary policy committee, which sets interest rates, believe the crisis will have a lasting impact on the economy. Asked when living standards enjoyed before the crisis would return, King said: "The research makes it clear that the impact of these crises lasts for many years. It is not like an ordinary recession, where you lose output and get it back quickly. We may not get the lost output back for very many years, if ever." King faced tough questions from Labour MPs who believe the Bank should not have supported the Treasury's cuts programme. Accused by Andy Love, the Labour MP for Edmonton, of giving George Osborne cover for spending cuts, King denied that meetings with the chancellor resulted in a cosy agreement to keep interest rates low to support austerity measures. He said: "There has never been any attempt on any occasion to influence the monetary policy committee on what decisions it should take." In a further provocation to the financial sector, King set out plans for an overhaul of City regulation and oversight that would allow banks to fail when they get into trouble. He told MPs it was necessary to move away from rules designed to prevent banks failing, with a safety net provided by taxpayers, to a system that allowed banks to fail in an orderly way. For those people who are angry, UKUncut is our only voice. Our politicians from all parties don't care. Big business and banks will contrinue to ride rough shod over us. http://www.UKUncut.org.uk This is absolute dynamite and one in the eye for all the 'It's Browns fault' trolls who like to pretend it was caused buy building all those nasty unneeded schools and hospitals. Why the big hush though? Never heard a mention of it on Rad 4 news this morning, a glance at the Tory attack dogs,The Sun and The Mail and surprise, surpise there is no mention of it there too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesday1 Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Merv the Swerve is a spineless, disingenuous weasel. His response to ever increasing inflation is "vigilance". Yep, Merv's "vigilance" and 3 quid will buy you a cup of coffee at Starbucks. Interestingly, the UK was posting record deficits in 2006. Care to explain THAT Merv? He had so much confidence in his anti-inflation policies that the MPC pension fund was transferred to index linked bonds. What a twunt. Oh dear. Is that a large yolk I can see running down somebodys' face! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 This is absolute dynamite and one in the eye for all the 'It's Browns fault' trolls who like to pretend it was caused buy building all those nasty unneeded schools and hospitals. Why the big hush though? Never heard a mention of it on Rad 4 news this morning, a glance at the Tory attack dogs,The Sun and The Mail and surprise, surpise there is no mention of it there too! Wasn't the previous government running up a deficit before the bankers bailout? The problem with the economy was it was built upon cheap credit, there was no way that the cheap credit was going to last forever, there had to be a plan B. Brown had no plan B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Even if the crisis in the financial service sector never happened, public spending would have still had to be reigned in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesday1 Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Wasn't the previous government running up a deficit before the bankers bailout? The problem with the economy was it was built upon cheap credit, there was no way that the cheap credit was going to last forever, there had to be a plan B. Brown had no plan B. After so many years of growth (sixteen I think, 1992-2008), he probably thought there was no need too! Remember the Cons said right up and to the credit crunch that they wouldn't cut public spending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.