Options

Bankers caused financial crisis, says governor of BoE

mRebelmRebel Posts: 24,882
Forum Member
✭✭✭
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2790469/bankers-caused-crash-got-away-says-carney-bank-england-chief-says-bosses-paid-higher-price.html

The Governor of the Bank of England last night launched a stinging attack on the bankers who caused the financial crisis and ‘got away without sanction’.
Mark Carney said the bosses of the banks behind the 2008 global financial crash should have paid a higher price for their errors.
Instead – despite facing limited social embarrassment – they were still on the ‘best golf courses’.
Speaking in Washington, Mr Carney said: ‘The individuals who ran the institutions got away with it. They got away with their compensation packages and without sanction.
‘Maybe they are no longer at the most esteemed table in society, but they are still on the best golf courses and that has got to change.’


During a panel discussion on financial ethics, Mr Carney made it clear he had no sympathy for board-level bankers who would not take personal responsibility for the actions of their organisations.
The Bank governor, who has been in Washington for a series of International Monetary Fund meetings, complained that the authorities had been unable to jail any of the bankers whose failings led to the global financial crisis.


He said: ‘If you are the chairman or the head of the risk committee, you have a responsibility for the activities of that institution.
‘If you don’t think you can do it, you shouldn’t be on the board.’
The new regulation regime of senior managers is designed to make it easier to bring criminal charges in a future banking crisis. Mr Carney added: ‘It does focus the mind of directors and it should. I would like to think that the minds of directors are being focused. Some of them might not like it – that’s okay


A central banker talking sense, that's new.
«134

Comments

  • Options
    MARTYM8MARTYM8 Posts: 44,710
    Forum Member
    Rank hypocrisy from a former employee of Goldman Sachs!

    He reminds me of Mavis Riley from Coronation street - always in the press saying something but never saying anything really definitive.
  • Options
    SULLASULLA Posts: 149,789
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    Banks have always attempted to make money from investments.
  • Options
    niceguy1966niceguy1966 Posts: 29,560
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Does he get a bonus for stating the bleeding obvious?
  • Options
    AnnsyreAnnsyre Posts: 109,504
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    mRebel wrote: »
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2790469/bankers-caused-crash-got-away-says-carney-bank-england-chief-says-bosses-paid-higher-price.html

    The Governor of the Bank of England last night launched a stinging attack on the bankers who caused the financial crisis and ‘got away without sanction’.
    Mark Carney said the bosses of the banks behind the 2008 global financial crash should have paid a higher price for their errors.
    Instead – despite facing limited social embarrassment – they were still on the ‘best golf courses’.
    Speaking in Washington, Mr Carney said: ‘The individuals who ran the institutions got away with it. They got away with their compensation packages and without sanction.
    ‘Maybe they are no longer at the most esteemed table in society, but they are still on the best golf courses and that has got to change.’


    During a panel discussion on financial ethics, Mr Carney made it clear he had no sympathy for board-level bankers who would not take personal responsibility for the actions of their organisations.
    The Bank governor, who has been in Washington for a series of International Monetary Fund meetings, complained that the authorities had been unable to jail any of the bankers whose failings led to the global financial crisis.


    He said: ‘If you are the chairman or the head of the risk committee, you have a responsibility for the activities of that institution.
    ‘If you don’t think you can do it, you shouldn’t be on the board.’
    The new regulation regime of senior managers is designed to make it easier to bring criminal charges in a future banking crisis. Mr Carney added: ‘It does focus the mind of directors and it should. I would like to think that the minds of directors are being focused. Some of them might not like it – that’s okay


    A central banker talking sense, that's new.


    I agree which means that those responsible can be held to account or even jailed is welcome.
  • Options
    jmclaughjmclaugh Posts: 63,997
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    This is all old hat and interesting he doesn't seem to mention the role of governments, central banks and other government agencies responsible for the regulation of banks etc with regard to the financial crisis.
  • Options
    jjnejjne Posts: 6,580
    Forum Member
    As an aside, I found it quite amusing that AIG shareholders in the US are suing the US government for agreeing to buy their crappy, bust company, worth $15bn in 2008, valuing it at $200bn, and lending it money at a higher than normal interest rate (when of course no-one else would lend to it at all, as it was insolvent).

    Companies like this should have just been allowed to fail, and Hank Greenburg should be told to swivel.
  • Options
    Glawster2002Glawster2002 Posts: 15,211
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    jmclaugh wrote: »
    This is all old hat and interesting he doesn't seem to mention the role of governments, central banks and other government agencies responsible for the regulation of banks etc with regard to the financial crisis.

    So it is the governments fault that the banks gambled and lost? It was the banks who told governments that too much regulation was holding back their business and that easing of those controls along with self-regulation was the way forward.

    The only people to blame are those who thought they were invincible and discovered they are human like the rest of us. As far as I'm concerned investors money should have been protected but the banks themselves should have been allowed to go to the wall. If I were to screw up in my job the way these people did there would only be one outcome, I'd lose my job. The same should apply for them but, of course, there's one rule for the rich and another for everyone else but it is everyone else who is expected to bail them out
  • Options
    jmclaughjmclaugh Posts: 63,997
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    So it is the governments fault that the banks gambled and lost? It was the banks who told governments that too much regulation was holding back their business and that easing of those controls along with self-regulation was the way forward.

    The only people to blame are those who thought they were invincible and discovered they are human like the rest of us. As far as I'm concerned investors money should have been protected but the banks themselves should have been allowed to go to the wall. If I were to screw up in my job the way these people did there would only be one outcome, I'd lose my job. The same should apply for them but, of course, there's one rule for the rich and another for everyone else but it is everyone else who is expected to bail them out

    I never said bankers were blameless it is obvious to anyone they weren't, nor did I say they shouldn't have been sacked and brought to book. I merely said Carney doesn't mention others were to blame as well and just about everybody also knows that, in short I fail to see why he bothered saying anything about it 6 years on.
  • Options
    StaunchyStaunchy Posts: 10,904
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    So it is the governments fault that the banks gambled and lost? It was the banks who told governments that too much regulation was holding back their business and that easing of those controls along with self-regulation was the way forward.

    The only people to blame are those who thought they were invincible and discovered they are human like the rest of us. As far as I'm concerned investors money should have been protected but the banks themselves should have been allowed to go to the wall. If I were to screw up in my job the way these people did there would only be one outcome, I'd lose my job. The same should apply for them but, of course, there's one rule for the rich and another for everyone else but it is everyone else who is expected to bail them out

    Do the words "no more boom and bust" ring a bell? ;-)


    Just because the banks wanted less government regulation doesn't mean the government had to oblige, even Brown admits he made mistakes in regulation.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13032013
  • Options
    northantsgirlnorthantsgirl Posts: 4,663
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Osborne will give him a good old telling off for this. It was Labour not the bankers that caused the financial crisis wasn't it George?
  • Options
    glasshalffullglasshalffull Posts: 22,291
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Osborne will give him a good old telling off for this. It was Labour not the bankers that caused the financial crisis wasn't it George?

    Not only that they managed to cause it across the whole world not just the UK.
  • Options
    jmclaughjmclaugh Posts: 63,997
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Not only that they managed to cause it across the whole world not just the UK.

    I'm sure you don't mean Labour but thank God Brown managed to save the world. :D
  • Options
    paulschapmanpaulschapman Posts: 35,536
    Forum Member
    Osborne will give him a good old telling off for this. It was Labour not the bankers that caused the financial crisis wasn't it George?

    No, it was the Bankers - Labour just set up the regulatory environment which let them do it in this country.
  • Options
    Glawster2002Glawster2002 Posts: 15,211
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Staunchy wrote: »
    Do the words "no more boom and bust" ring a bell? ;-)


    Just because the banks wanted less government regulation doesn't mean the government had to oblige, even Brown admits he made mistakes in regulation.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13032013

    However the greed-driven recklessness should have been picked up during internal audits long before the banks collapsed which is why those at the top are just as culpable, if not more so. They were too keen to "turn a blind eye" to wat was going on beneath them because, of course, the artificially inflated profits added to their bonuses as well.
  • Options
    glasshalffullglasshalffull Posts: 22,291
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    No, it was the Bankers - Labour just set up the regulatory environment which let them do it in this country.

    That would be the regulations the Tories voted against I assume...the ones they opposed because they thought they were too strict...
  • Options
    TheTruth1983TheTruth1983 Posts: 13,462
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The whole monetary system caused the financial crisis and both banks and government had a very significant hand in it all.

    The worst thing? All the same mistakes that led to the crisis are being made again.
  • Options
    jjnejjne Posts: 6,580
    Forum Member
    The worst thing? All the same mistakes that led to the crisis are being made again.

    Actually, I'd say the worst thing is that the banks now know that the governments are patsies and will bail them out when they overstretch themselves again. That pretty much guarantees a repeat run.
  • Options
    paulschapmanpaulschapman Posts: 35,536
    Forum Member
    That would be the regulations the Tories voted against I assume...the ones they opposed because they thought they were too strict...

    Sorry I thought the Labour Party was in power from 1997-2010. Not only that they had a good majority for that time as well.

    And No. I am referring to the structure of regulation - said it before and will say it again. Regulation was moved to the FSA which proved to be incapable and even it's former chairman admitted as much.
  • Options
    StaunchyStaunchy Posts: 10,904
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    However the greed-driven recklessness should have been picked up during internal audits long before the banks collapsed which is why those at the top are just as culpable, if not more so. They were too keen to "turn a blind eye" to wat was going on beneath them because, of course, the artificially inflated profits added to their bonuses as well.

    Yes indeed, but I think it's all too simplistic to solely blame the bankers


    Again you have posted something that could also be attributed to the UK government of the time, by replacing "bonuses" with "taxes".
    They were too keen to "turn a blind eye" to wat was going on beneath them because, of course, the artificially inflated profits added to their bonuses as well

    My view is that it wasn't just the bankers and it wasn't just the government but a mixture of the two, take one part away and it couldn't have happened. Both sides' judgement was clouded by the amount of money that was coming in.
  • Options
    OLD HIPPY GUYOLD HIPPY GUY Posts: 28,199
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Utter nonsense, everyone knows it was caused by people 'on benefits' and people with a 'spare bedroom' we know this because the beloved leader has quite rightly been punishing them for their crimes, while rewarding people like our wonderful bankers,

    If what this thought criminal is saying were true it would mean that the beloved leader had been punishing the innocent while rewarding the guilty, and we all know that the beloved leader is infallible because he is perfect and therefore can not possibly ever make a mistake,
    I urge everyone to ignore this liar and get on with their wonderful lives, leave him to the thought police I am certain they will know how to deal with him.
  • Options
    niceguy1966niceguy1966 Posts: 29,560
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    That would be the regulations the Tories voted against I assume...the ones they opposed because they thought they were too strict...

    Too subtle

    :D
  • Options
    TheTruth1983TheTruth1983 Posts: 13,462
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Utter nonsense, everyone knows it was caused by people 'on benefits' and people with a 'spare bedroom' we know this because the beloved leader has quite rightly been punishing them for their crimes, while rewarding people like our wonderful bankers,

    If what this thought criminal is saying were true it would mean that the beloved leader had been punishing the innocent while rewarding the guilty, and we all know that the beloved leader is infallible because he is perfect and therefore can not possibly ever make a mistake,
    I urge everyone to ignore this liar and get on with their wonderful lives, leave him to the thought police I am certain they will know how to deal with him.

    You forgot immigrants
  • Options
    StaunchyStaunchy Posts: 10,904
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    jjne wrote: »
    Actually, I'd say the worst thing is that the banks now know that the governments are patsies and will bail them out when they overstretch themselves again. That pretty much guarantees a repeat run.

    Yes, where's the deterrent?
  • Options
    TheTruth1983TheTruth1983 Posts: 13,462
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    jjne wrote: »
    Actually, I'd say the worst thing is that the banks now know that the governments are patsies and will bail them out when they overstretch themselves again. That pretty much guarantees a repeat run.

    Yep, banks are still too big to fail. The next crash will be even bigger so the resulting bailout will also be even bigger.

    On the plus side, the next crash may be the one that kills the fiat currency ponzi scheme completely.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 14,922
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    jmclaugh wrote: »
    This is all old hat and interesting he doesn't seem to mention the role of governments, central banks and other government agencies responsible for the regulation of banks etc with regard to the financial crisis.

    Which regulation should have been in place, or has been put in place since, to prevent banks buying AAA rated investments?
Sign In or Register to comment.