PLAID is right to call for any banking reform to benefit small businesses. It is very important that the Banking White Paper does not water down proposals for the separation of retail and investment banking interests which will protect ordinary customers money.
That said, few outside the Westminster village will be shocked to discover that the wealthy banking lobby have successfully in persuaded the Con-Dems to relax recommendations from the Independent Commission on Banking. These recommendations related to enforcing a separation between retail banks, which hold savers deposits, and investment banks which use investors funds to make money (casino banking).
Plaid also called for an end to credit default swaps for businesses, warning that small companies have been mis-sold complex financial products by banks and then have found themselves in financial difficulty afterwards. A complete separation of retail and investment banking interests should provide significantly better protection for customers and small businesses and should take much of the risk out of banking.
We should never again allow ourselves to be in the situation where private sector investment banker's failures can effectively bring the economy crashing down on the rest of us. Retail banks where consumers, including families and small businesses, deposit their savings need to be protected thus ensuring their long-term sustainability.
All pretty sensible stuff, the bad news is that the banking lobby already appear to have been busy persuading the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats to water down the recommendations of the independent commission on banking. The problem is that weakened proposals may not protect small businesses who have been mis-sold complex financial products in recent years and some of whom may never see their money again.
Plaid Cymru has long argued that banks should not have interests and risks which could be to the detriment of the entire sector and to the wider economy. The problem is that when New Labour had their noses in the trough (between 1997 and 2010) the importance of the financial sector grew from 11% of the total economy to more than 18%.
This unbalanced the economy largely because New Labour (and the Conservative Government's before them) turned their backs on the manufacturing sector, something that hit the Welsh economy and our manufacturing sector badly and ensured that an even greater inequality between London and the rest of the UK. This is one of the reasons why the UK was hit so badly when the crash came and has been struggling to recover since.
Interestingly enough a recent poll in the Independent on Sunday (17.06.2012) revealed that 59% thought that George Osborne is out of touch with the public (20% disagreed and 21% didn't know), 25% thought that he is leading the country's economy in the right direction (46% disagreed, 29% didn't know). Some 52% thought he was arrogant (24% disagreed and 24% didn't know) and 48% thought that he had made too many mistakes to be taken seriously (25% disagreed and 26% didn't know).
Additionally 25% agreed that George was doing a good job in difficult times - some 46% disagreed and 27% didn't know. The final poll question asked whether citizen Osborne is too posh to understand the financial pressures on ordinary people – 55% agreed, 23% disagreed and 22% didn't know.
Showing posts with label the banking crisis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label the banking crisis. Show all posts
Monday, 18 June 2012
Sunday, 28 August 2011
ALL IN IT TOGETHER?
News that George Osborne has done a deal with the Swiss in relation to the secret bank accounts held by UK citizens may not wholly be good news. There has been much speculation as to exactly how much the new levy will bring in and the figure of £5 billion pounds has been bounced about by the Sunday papers.
I am sure that an extra £5 billion would be nice, I mean we have to pay for those pesky bank bonuses or those aircraft carriers somehow. What has, however, been largely overlooked is that what Osborne has done is effectively legitimise the holding of bank accounts that are secret from the Inland Revenue.
We still need to (globally) deal with the problem of off-shore companies and individuals who are engaged in tax avoidance, tax evasion or money laundering. The scale of the problem is quite staggering, take the Cayman Islands; which are home to some 12,000 corporations and have a population of 50,000, yet are home to 70% of the planets hedge funds.
The British Virgin Islands (population 22,000) is home to 823,502 registered companies. General Electric paid no tax in 2010, yet made a $14.2 billion dollar profit. Barclay's has 181 subsidiaries registered in the Cayman Islands and paid little UK tax on its world wide profits. The Dirty Digger’s News Corp has 152 subsidiaries in tax havens across the planet (according to the US Government) and paid no UK corporation tax between 1998 and 1999.
If developed countries exchequers lose out then it’s much worse for developing countries. Tax dodging costs developing countries $ 160 billion dollars per year (Christian Aid). Some $ 1.2 trillion dollars was illicitly removed from poor countries in 2008 (US Integrity Research Centre).
If the governments of the world got together, as President Obama suggested, and tackled the tax havens, the tax avoidance and the questionable dealings of the derivative traders, hedge funds and the off balance sheet trading then we may go so way towards dealing with the consequences of the worldwide financial crash. Perhaps if that nice (rich) Mr Cameron and the other 18 millionaires in the cabinet were to work with other governments worldwide to close the tax loopholes then perhaps we truly would all be in it together? Perhaps not!
Saturday, 14 May 2011
MEASURING PROGRESS?
 |
| President Obama |
Just in case you forget, it was back in January (2009) when President Obama announced two more than reasonable measures to curb the banks, the first aimed to stop banks from engaging in proprietary trading, private equity, or any other activity for their own profit unrelated to serving customers. The second measure aimed to take further steps to limit the balance sheet size of banks so that they cannot in future acquire “too big to fail” status.
 |
| Theodore Roosevelt |
There are times when you can find yourself wondering just exactly how far we have progressed in the last hundred years of so? In the later years of the nineteenth century and the early years of the twentieth century US Presidents, Presidential candidates and politicians including Theodore Roosevelt (a Republican) and William Jennings Bryan (a Democratic Presidential candidate) were opposed to the power of big business and fought against the dangers of monopoly capitalism (as personified by ‘Standard Oil’ and ‘the Trusts’ in Teddy’s case).
 |
| William Jennings Bryan |
While Westminster bailed out the banks with massive public subsidies, which effectively made some of the banks 'publicly owned’, they are still run by bankers, who are so thick skinned that they carry on regardless with the awarding of bonuses. The Con Dem UK Government should have seriously consider breaking up and ‘privatising’, perhaps selling the shares on the open market (with specific quotas on how many shares any one institution can own) – because from where many people are sat these bloated banking organisations appear to be a serious block on the ‘free market’.
There is still a pressing need for similar rules for financial institutions across the globe, off shore must become a matter of historical record – there must be no where the financial institutions can hide and no more endless threats of taking their “ball” (businesses operations) elsewhere and relocating because they have lost their so called special status. It's important to remember, that no one, not even bankers or MPs are above the law and no one is above financial regulation, scrutiny, free from responsibility and consequences for ones actions.
The OCED has estimated that some $10 trillion dollars worth of private wealth is concealed in Paradis Fscaux (tax havens). These financial dead letter drops tend to be used by banks, multi-national companies, corporations, the super (and not so super) rich, drug dealers, dictators, terrorists, fraudsters and other criminals who use them to hide and launder their wealth. One side effect of Paradis Fiscau is that they enable people and organisations to avoid paying their fair dues to the society in which they live, unlike the rest of us mere mortals.
To put things in perspective - that $10 trillion dollar figure produced by the OCED means that the lost taxation normally accrued would be more than double the entire planet's global aid budget. President Obama, President Sarlozy and Chancellor Merkel are on record saying that off-shore capital needs to be properly regulated - Gordon Brown (remember him?) waffled, the Con Dems are pretty quiet or are they merely in the pockets of the money men in the City.
In relation to the banking crisis and the vast debts that us mere mortals are having to repay, perhaps is best to paraphrase Winston Churchill, 'Never have so many had to pay so much on behalf of so few!'. And we are going to carry on paying...and the money men continue to escape regulation... so much for progress...
Monday, 4 April 2011
THE PARTY FORMERLY KNOWN AS NEW LABOUR
The Labour Party (once formerly known New Labour) are quietly hoping that people will simply forget the terrible mess they created when they were in power at Westminster and the cuts they would have implemented had they not been deservedly thrown out by the electorate. New (and Old) Labour were pretty good on sound-bites but well short on actual delivery, Harold Wilson, once talked about "The white heat of the technological revolution" (on October 1st 1963) yet once the dust had settled after six years of Labour Government very little had changed and very little was delivered as vested interests in the Labour Movement thwarted any real economic reform.
History has almost repeated itself, save for that now after nearly 13 years in power the Labour Party is now back wallowing in its comfort zone, safely out of office at Westminster, safely free from responsibility, they are enjoying what they love to do best – attacking the Tories. And talking up the Tory threat (as well practised by Peter Hain) in the Welsh General election is Labour's bottom line and works along the line of if you tell a simple big enough lie often enough then people will eventually believe it.
There is a long history of to the Labour sound-bite, Harold Wilson said in his 1961 Labour Party Conference speech "The Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing". It seems that the answer is that it is nothing. More recently Tony Blair said "It is not an arrogant government that chooses priorities, it's an irresponsible government that fails to choose". New Labour consistently failed to choose to act to make Wales better and consistently choose to put Party interest before principle and the interests of the people of Wales.
At one very basic level, why not? There is certainly a great deal to attack the Tories (and their Liberal Democrat little helpers) for when it comes to our public services and our economy. But do Labour, not so New, Not so New Labour or whatever they choose to call themselves actually have any real credibility when it comes to attacking the Tories on these issues?
Certainly the party formerly known as New Labour's recent history is marked by a series of of opportunities wasted by Labour in government, the things they could have done, and were supposed to fight for, but chose not to. Fair funding for Wales under Labour, so that would be a No then. Electrifying the Great Western from Swansea to London, that would be a very reluctant Yes, but only after Plaid (and Ieuan Wyn Jones) put them in a situation where they had no other option - originally they planned to electrify the Great Western from Bristol to London - perhaps they helped that we in Wales would not notice.
To sum up, Labour are the 'friends' who are never there when you need them. Labour was the friend that the people of Wales turned to for the best part of one hundred years when faced with economic and political adversity. Through strikes, recession, the Thatcher and Major years the people sought comfort from their natural political home and got scant reward for it during the 13 years of Labour Government. New Labour did nothing to curb the irresponsibility of the bankers and little to support our manufacturing industry and or small to medium sized businesses, that are the lifeblood of much of the Welsh economy.
When given the opportunity (and the Westminster majority to match) to implement real and lasting improvements to the lives of its loyal supporters, New Labour was the friend that offers warm words in opposition, but is never there when you really need them, when they actually had the power to deliver for the Welsh people, they chose not too. Come the 5th May, we all to remember New and Old Labour's failure to deliver for Wales, and cast our votes accordingly.
History has almost repeated itself, save for that now after nearly 13 years in power the Labour Party is now back wallowing in its comfort zone, safely out of office at Westminster, safely free from responsibility, they are enjoying what they love to do best – attacking the Tories. And talking up the Tory threat (as well practised by Peter Hain) in the Welsh General election is Labour's bottom line and works along the line of if you tell a simple big enough lie often enough then people will eventually believe it.
There is a long history of to the Labour sound-bite, Harold Wilson said in his 1961 Labour Party Conference speech "The Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing". It seems that the answer is that it is nothing. More recently Tony Blair said "It is not an arrogant government that chooses priorities, it's an irresponsible government that fails to choose". New Labour consistently failed to choose to act to make Wales better and consistently choose to put Party interest before principle and the interests of the people of Wales.
At one very basic level, why not? There is certainly a great deal to attack the Tories (and their Liberal Democrat little helpers) for when it comes to our public services and our economy. But do Labour, not so New, Not so New Labour or whatever they choose to call themselves actually have any real credibility when it comes to attacking the Tories on these issues?
Certainly the party formerly known as New Labour's recent history is marked by a series of of opportunities wasted by Labour in government, the things they could have done, and were supposed to fight for, but chose not to. Fair funding for Wales under Labour, so that would be a No then. Electrifying the Great Western from Swansea to London, that would be a very reluctant Yes, but only after Plaid (and Ieuan Wyn Jones) put them in a situation where they had no other option - originally they planned to electrify the Great Western from Bristol to London - perhaps they helped that we in Wales would not notice.
To sum up, Labour are the 'friends' who are never there when you need them. Labour was the friend that the people of Wales turned to for the best part of one hundred years when faced with economic and political adversity. Through strikes, recession, the Thatcher and Major years the people sought comfort from their natural political home and got scant reward for it during the 13 years of Labour Government. New Labour did nothing to curb the irresponsibility of the bankers and little to support our manufacturing industry and or small to medium sized businesses, that are the lifeblood of much of the Welsh economy.
When given the opportunity (and the Westminster majority to match) to implement real and lasting improvements to the lives of its loyal supporters, New Labour was the friend that offers warm words in opposition, but is never there when you really need them, when they actually had the power to deliver for the Welsh people, they chose not too. Come the 5th May, we all to remember New and Old Labour's failure to deliver for Wales, and cast our votes accordingly.
Tuesday, 22 February 2011
DODGING THE ELECTORAL BULLET?
On Friday 25th February 2011 the people of the Irish Republic go to the polls to pass judgement on those who oversaw the collapse of the Irish economy in the banking crisis. The Irish people are a tad angry and a potential if selective electoral armageddon may well be anticipated. Fianna Fail, who were in charge when the Irish economy went bust, in the last election it won 42% of the vote; the latest poll suggests support is down to 12% - ouch!
This side of the Irish Sea this is a particular electoral bullet that New Labour has by and large so far managed to dodge. Admittedly they lost the Westminster election, no doubt with a degree of quiet relief because their defeat meant that the Con Dem’s will have to carry the can for the inevitable cuts to the public sector that followed the economic meltdown that had been overseen by New Labour.
New (or former New) Labour has no positioned it as the protector of the public sector, despite the fact that they (had they won the last Westminster election) would not doubt have indulged in equally savage public sector spending cuts. As we progress to the Welsh General Election on May 5th its worth remembering the mess that New Labour created and the harsh price that we are all paying to rectify their failures.
This side of the Irish Sea this is a particular electoral bullet that New Labour has by and large so far managed to dodge. Admittedly they lost the Westminster election, no doubt with a degree of quiet relief because their defeat meant that the Con Dem’s will have to carry the can for the inevitable cuts to the public sector that followed the economic meltdown that had been overseen by New Labour.
New (or former New) Labour has no positioned it as the protector of the public sector, despite the fact that they (had they won the last Westminster election) would not doubt have indulged in equally savage public sector spending cuts. As we progress to the Welsh General Election on May 5th its worth remembering the mess that New Labour created and the harsh price that we are all paying to rectify their failures.
Monday, 22 November 2010
THEY DOTH PROTEST TOO MUCH...
The Labour Party in Wales has said that Wales is underfunded to the tune of £300m which is something that the Holtham Commission, which looked into the way Wales is funded, reported. While I am pleased that the Labour Party in Wales has finally recognised this, I find it hard to reconcile it with the fact that they were in government for 13 years and did precisely nothing to change the flawed Barnet funding system, when they had the opportunity. Now, being in opposition in (and out of) Westminster and in Government in Cardiff Bay, all is urgency (or political expediency) and the crocodile tears begin to flow copiously...
There is that more than faint whiff of self satisfied smug glee and more than a little joyful if not ecstatic hand rubbing from some of Tory mainstream (sorry right) in relation to the mess that some of the Euro zone countries have got themselves into, ignoring the fact that the Euro is actually pretty sound, the problem is being caused by the banking idiocy that gripped much of the world - something that most governments did little to try and curb or criticise when things were bubbling along quite nicely.
The Irish situation is more complicated than most as successive Irish governments made significant quantities of hay while the sun shined brightly and appear to have made little or no provision for rockier economic times (just like almost every other government on the planet) and now the Irish people are paying for it (just like us). All governments Europe and worldwide would do well to note the slowly (and not so slowly) rising degrees of discontent that that paying for the banking crash is generating.
There is that more than faint whiff of self satisfied smug glee and more than a little joyful if not ecstatic hand rubbing from some of Tory mainstream (sorry right) in relation to the mess that some of the Euro zone countries have got themselves into, ignoring the fact that the Euro is actually pretty sound, the problem is being caused by the banking idiocy that gripped much of the world - something that most governments did little to try and curb or criticise when things were bubbling along quite nicely.
The Irish situation is more complicated than most as successive Irish governments made significant quantities of hay while the sun shined brightly and appear to have made little or no provision for rockier economic times (just like almost every other government on the planet) and now the Irish people are paying for it (just like us). All governments Europe and worldwide would do well to note the slowly (and not so slowly) rising degrees of discontent that that paying for the banking crash is generating.
Sunday, 11 July 2010
PARADIS FISCAUX
In relation to the banking crisis and the vast debts that us mere mortals are having to repay, perhaps is best to paraphrase Winston Churchill, 'Never have so many had to pay so much on behalf of so few!'. George Osborne and the Tories have reluctantly gone along with the much publicly stated need to regulate the more unsavoury aspects of the banking sector. The question is will they sign up to President Obama's stated aim to regulate tax havens?
Just in case you forget, back in January (2009) President Obama announced two measures to curb the banks, the first aimed to stop banks from engaging in proprietary trading, private equity, or any other activity for their own profit unrelated to serving customers. The second measure aimed to take further steps to limit the balance sheet size of banks so that they cannot in future acquire “too big to fail” status.
President Obama is right to characterise his proposals as a victory for common sense and while we may have some way to go before the banks are forced to act responsibly, the first steps have been taken. I wonder if David Cameron will follow suit sooner or later – or are the Tories (despite everything that has happened in an almost unregulated, greed driven finance sector over the last few years) still far to enamoured with their friends, the dodgy money men in the City of London.
On occasion you may find yourself wondering exactly how far we have progressed in the last hundred years of so? In the later years of the nineteenth century and the early years of the twentieth century US Presidents, Presidential candidates and politicians including Theodore Roosevelt (a Republican) and William Jennings Bryan a Democratic Presidential candidate) were opposed to the power of big business and fought against the dangers of monopoly capitalism (as personified by ‘Standard Oil’ and 'the Trusts’ in Teddy’s case). In 1896, William Jennings Bryan, a future Democratic presidential nominee, warning against the power of finance, said: “You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.”
President Roosevelt and William Jennings Bryan had (and in my opinion has) a valid point - if you believe in the ‘free market’ (and the City money men claim to) then no organisation can be too big to be allowed not to fail. The massive public subsidies effectively made some of the banks 'publicly owned’, yet they are still largely run by bankers who are so thick skinned or self interested that they carried on regardless when it came to the awarding of bonuses - would that they had been more generous when it come to advancing loans to small to medium sized and larger businesses in their hour of need.
The new Con Dem UK Government should seriously consider breaking up and 'privatising' the larger 'publicly owned' financial institutions, and selling shares on the open market (with specific quotas on how many shares any one institution can own) – because from where many people are sat these bloated overgrown banking organisations appear to be a serious block on the ‘free market’.
We also need to a degree of similar rules for financial institutions across the globe, off shore must become a matter of historical record – there must be no where the financial institutions can hide and no more endless threats of taking their “ball” (businesses operations) elsewhere and relocating because they have lost their so called special status. it is important to remember, that no one, not even bankers (or MPs) are above the law and no one is above financial regulation and scrutiny.
The OCED estimated that some $10 trillion dollars worth of private wealth is concealed in Paradis Fiscaux (tax havens). These financial dead letter drops tend to be used by banks, multi-national companies, corporations, the super (and not so super) rich, drug dealers, dictators, terrorists, fraudsters and other criminals who use them to hide and launder their wealth. One significant side effect of Paradis Fiscaux is that they enable people and organisations to avoid paying their fair dues to the society in which they live, unlike the rest of us mere mortals.
To put things in perspective - the $10 trillion dollar figure produced by the OCED means that the lost taxation normally accused would be more than double the entire planet's global aid budget. President Obama, President Sarkozy and Chancellor Merkel are on record saying that off-shore capital needs to be properly regulated - Gordon Brown (remember him?) waffled, will the Con Dems sign up or are they in the pockets of the money men in the City or under the influence of Lord Ashcroft - who's
heart may be in Belize with his wallet?
Just in case you forget, back in January (2009) President Obama announced two measures to curb the banks, the first aimed to stop banks from engaging in proprietary trading, private equity, or any other activity for their own profit unrelated to serving customers. The second measure aimed to take further steps to limit the balance sheet size of banks so that they cannot in future acquire “too big to fail” status.
President Obama is right to characterise his proposals as a victory for common sense and while we may have some way to go before the banks are forced to act responsibly, the first steps have been taken. I wonder if David Cameron will follow suit sooner or later – or are the Tories (despite everything that has happened in an almost unregulated, greed driven finance sector over the last few years) still far to enamoured with their friends, the dodgy money men in the City of London.
On occasion you may find yourself wondering exactly how far we have progressed in the last hundred years of so? In the later years of the nineteenth century and the early years of the twentieth century US Presidents, Presidential candidates and politicians including Theodore Roosevelt (a Republican) and William Jennings Bryan a Democratic Presidential candidate) were opposed to the power of big business and fought against the dangers of monopoly capitalism (as personified by ‘Standard Oil’ and 'the Trusts’ in Teddy’s case). In 1896, William Jennings Bryan, a future Democratic presidential nominee, warning against the power of finance, said: “You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.”
President Roosevelt and William Jennings Bryan had (and in my opinion has) a valid point - if you believe in the ‘free market’ (and the City money men claim to) then no organisation can be too big to be allowed not to fail. The massive public subsidies effectively made some of the banks 'publicly owned’, yet they are still largely run by bankers who are so thick skinned or self interested that they carried on regardless when it came to the awarding of bonuses - would that they had been more generous when it come to advancing loans to small to medium sized and larger businesses in their hour of need.
The new Con Dem UK Government should seriously consider breaking up and 'privatising' the larger 'publicly owned' financial institutions, and selling shares on the open market (with specific quotas on how many shares any one institution can own) – because from where many people are sat these bloated overgrown banking organisations appear to be a serious block on the ‘free market’.
We also need to a degree of similar rules for financial institutions across the globe, off shore must become a matter of historical record – there must be no where the financial institutions can hide and no more endless threats of taking their “ball” (businesses operations) elsewhere and relocating because they have lost their so called special status. it is important to remember, that no one, not even bankers (or MPs) are above the law and no one is above financial regulation and scrutiny.
The OCED estimated that some $10 trillion dollars worth of private wealth is concealed in Paradis Fiscaux (tax havens). These financial dead letter drops tend to be used by banks, multi-national companies, corporations, the super (and not so super) rich, drug dealers, dictators, terrorists, fraudsters and other criminals who use them to hide and launder their wealth. One significant side effect of Paradis Fiscaux is that they enable people and organisations to avoid paying their fair dues to the society in which they live, unlike the rest of us mere mortals.
To put things in perspective - the $10 trillion dollar figure produced by the OCED means that the lost taxation normally accused would be more than double the entire planet's global aid budget. President Obama, President Sarkozy and Chancellor Merkel are on record saying that off-shore capital needs to be properly regulated - Gordon Brown (remember him?) waffled, will the Con Dems sign up or are they in the pockets of the money men in the City or under the influence of Lord Ashcroft - who's
heart may be in Belize with his wallet?
Saturday, 27 March 2010
TRELLECH HUSTINGS
The first Hustings of the final stages of this Westminster campaign took place last night in Trellech - very well organised (by the Trellech Big Issues Forum, well chaired and well attended (and well lit by Mon TV's TV lights). With six candidates who covered a wide range of topics from the economic crisis through Development Aid and Climate Change / Global Warming and Votes for 16 year old's and much else along the way.
My Conservative opponent (aside from being blinded by the light (just like the rest of us to varying degrees) made much of his opposition to extending the franchise to 16 years old's - I suspect much of what he said, was also said about extending the franchise to women, about abolishing the business vote and extending the franchise to those under 21. One thing to remember is that at 16 you will (if you have a job) pay tax, so where's the representation?
And a final thought, have the Conservatives ever been in favour (as opposed to being against things) of anything?
My Conservative opponent (aside from being blinded by the light (just like the rest of us to varying degrees) made much of his opposition to extending the franchise to 16 years old's - I suspect much of what he said, was also said about extending the franchise to women, about abolishing the business vote and extending the franchise to those under 21. One thing to remember is that at 16 you will (if you have a job) pay tax, so where's the representation?
And a final thought, have the Conservatives ever been in favour (as opposed to being against things) of anything?
Sunday, 7 March 2010
THE TOOLS TO DO THE JOB
The Plaid driven one Wales Government is doing its best with limited powers, but, it still has one hand effectively tied behind its back by London based Government which appears, even after the greed induced stupidity fed banking crisis still appears to value the City and the Square mile above of all else. If we want to make things better then we need to fundamentally review economic policy and help to develop the local workforce’s skills which will help create the economic climate where local firms can develop, grow and prosper develop long-term sustainable economic prosperity and long-term employment in our communities and to do this Wales need more control of economic decision making.
There is a profound need to target economic policy on a regional basis across Wales, so that everyone benefits, not only those living immediately alongside the M4 corridor. The Plaid driven one Wales Government needs to help grow our small to medium enterprise (SME) sector, side by side with supporting the re-skilling of the workforce, if we do this then we can secure sustainable, long term economic growth and employment, if we don’t then we may slip back to boom and bust.
We are still facing a major economic challenge as large production companies see Eastern Europe (and beyond) as a cheaper location. Our rural industries, as well as those inside the traditional industrial heartland are especially vulnerable, as their economic viability is brought into question by a variety of reasons, including the astronomical rise in fuel and energy costs, the economic power of the supermarkets, European regulations on waste disposal, and the issues surrounding food imports as many companies are operating on somewhat slender profit margins.
One of the lessons that can be learned from Ireland is that a workforce’s skills are still fundamental to the success of a country’s economy and to economic development. Ireland was able to use use a third of its European funding to educate its workforce with new skills, as long as we are unable to do this here in Wales then our small businesses and our workforce will be disadvantaged. In Ireland the lower corporation tax was key component in attracting international investment.
Between 1972 and 2002 the Irish economy grew, on average, by 5% a year whilst the growth of the Welsh economy was less than 2% a year. In planning our economic future, we need hands on rather than hands off; it is vital that we look to our own resources and specifically to developing the SME sized businesses. Our local businesses, rather than multi national firms are much less likely to pack up and leave Wales for the cheaper labour markets of Eastern Europe and Asia.
There is a profound need to target economic policy on a regional basis across Wales, so that everyone benefits, not only those living immediately alongside the M4 corridor. The Plaid driven one Wales Government needs to help grow our small to medium enterprise (SME) sector, side by side with supporting the re-skilling of the workforce, if we do this then we can secure sustainable, long term economic growth and employment, if we don’t then we may slip back to boom and bust.
We are still facing a major economic challenge as large production companies see Eastern Europe (and beyond) as a cheaper location. Our rural industries, as well as those inside the traditional industrial heartland are especially vulnerable, as their economic viability is brought into question by a variety of reasons, including the astronomical rise in fuel and energy costs, the economic power of the supermarkets, European regulations on waste disposal, and the issues surrounding food imports as many companies are operating on somewhat slender profit margins.
One of the lessons that can be learned from Ireland is that a workforce’s skills are still fundamental to the success of a country’s economy and to economic development. Ireland was able to use use a third of its European funding to educate its workforce with new skills, as long as we are unable to do this here in Wales then our small businesses and our workforce will be disadvantaged. In Ireland the lower corporation tax was key component in attracting international investment.
Between 1972 and 2002 the Irish economy grew, on average, by 5% a year whilst the growth of the Welsh economy was less than 2% a year. In planning our economic future, we need hands on rather than hands off; it is vital that we look to our own resources and specifically to developing the SME sized businesses. Our local businesses, rather than multi national firms are much less likely to pack up and leave Wales for the cheaper labour markets of Eastern Europe and Asia.
Friday, 22 January 2010
CHANGE IS COMING?
US President Barack Obama’s announcement about two key measures to curb the banks, should be welcomed, the first aims to stop banks from engaging in proprietary trading, private equity, or any other activity for their own profit unrelated to serving customers. The second measure aims to take further steps to limit the balance sheet size of banks so that they cannot in future acquire “too big to fail” status.
President Obama is right to characterise his proposals as a victory for common sense and while we may have some way to g before the banks are forced to act responsibly, the first steps have been taken. I wonder if Gordon Brown (and David Cameron) will have the guts to follow suit sooner or later – or are they and their respective parties still far to enamoured with the dodgy money men in the City of London.
Occasionally you really wonder far we have progressed in the last hundred years of so? In the later years of the nineteenth century and the early years of the twentieth century US Presidents, Presidential candidates and politicians including Theodore Roosevelt (a Republican) and William Jennings Bryan (a Democratic Presidential candidate) were opposed to the power of big business and fought against the dangers of monopoly capitalism (as personified by ‘Standard Oil’ and ‘the Trusts’ in Teddy’s case). In 1896, William Jennings Bryan, a future Democratic presidential nominee, warning against the power of finance, said: “You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.”
President Roosevelt and William Jennings Bryan had (and has) a valid point - if you believe in the ‘free market’ (and the City money men claim to) then no organisation can be too big to be allowed not to fail. With what amount to massive public subsidies and effectively ‘publicly owned’ banks, run by bankers who are so thick skinned that they carry on regardless with the awarding of bonuses; then perhaps the UK Government should seriously consider breaking up and ‘privatising’, and sell shares on the open market (with quotas on how many shares any one institution can own) – because from where many people are sat these bloated banking organisations appear to be a block on the ‘free market’.
We also need to a degree of similar rules for financial institutions across the globe, off shore must become a matter of historical record – there must be no where the financial institutions can hide and no more endless threats of taking their “ball” (businesses operations) elsewhere and relocating because they have lost their so called special status. it is important to remember, that no one, not even bankers (or MPs) are above the law and no one is above financial regulation and scrutiny.
President Obama is right to characterise his proposals as a victory for common sense and while we may have some way to g before the banks are forced to act responsibly, the first steps have been taken. I wonder if Gordon Brown (and David Cameron) will have the guts to follow suit sooner or later – or are they and their respective parties still far to enamoured with the dodgy money men in the City of London.
Occasionally you really wonder far we have progressed in the last hundred years of so? In the later years of the nineteenth century and the early years of the twentieth century US Presidents, Presidential candidates and politicians including Theodore Roosevelt (a Republican) and William Jennings Bryan (a Democratic Presidential candidate) were opposed to the power of big business and fought against the dangers of monopoly capitalism (as personified by ‘Standard Oil’ and ‘the Trusts’ in Teddy’s case). In 1896, William Jennings Bryan, a future Democratic presidential nominee, warning against the power of finance, said: “You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.”
President Roosevelt and William Jennings Bryan had (and has) a valid point - if you believe in the ‘free market’ (and the City money men claim to) then no organisation can be too big to be allowed not to fail. With what amount to massive public subsidies and effectively ‘publicly owned’ banks, run by bankers who are so thick skinned that they carry on regardless with the awarding of bonuses; then perhaps the UK Government should seriously consider breaking up and ‘privatising’, and sell shares on the open market (with quotas on how many shares any one institution can own) – because from where many people are sat these bloated banking organisations appear to be a block on the ‘free market’.
We also need to a degree of similar rules for financial institutions across the globe, off shore must become a matter of historical record – there must be no where the financial institutions can hide and no more endless threats of taking their “ball” (businesses operations) elsewhere and relocating because they have lost their so called special status. it is important to remember, that no one, not even bankers (or MPs) are above the law and no one is above financial regulation and scrutiny.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)