Comments on: Bank of England turns more radical on bank terror

By: BigBadBank

BigBadBank — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 10:58:28 +0000

@ Shortsqueeze – The relevance of an extra £20 or £30 billion in annual revenue escapes you?

By: SallyC

SallyC — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 15:22:32 +0000

I thought this was interesting – from Andy Haldane’s biography on the Bof E website – ‘Before taking up his current role, Andy set up and headed the Systemic Risk Assessment Division within the Financial Stability area of the Bank from 2005.’ The Bank of England obviously thought that he was so successful at spotting systemic risk problems from 2005 -2009, that they decided to make him Executive Director, Financial Stability on 1 January 2009. I, in the meantime, despair! Maybe I am being too critical, but I have not been impressed with any of the recent talks given by Bank of England personnel. Haldane was right to bring up the subject of the benefit enjoyed by British banks of operating with either an explicit guarantee (RBS,Lloyds,Northern Rock), or an implicit guarantee ( Barclays,HSBC and possibly Standard and Chartered Bank) by the British government/people. But the figures he quotes are way too low given the size of these banks’ balance sheets!!!

By: Shortsqueeze

Shortsqueeze — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 12:20:33 +0000

The relevance of this never ending banking debate, relative to the conundrum of extrication from this financial mess escapes me, as the spotlight is now on the Sovereigns and how they intend to deal with the insanely high level of private sector liabilities they have in their infinite wisdom assumed.

By: Story_Burn

Story_Burn — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 00:44:42 +0000

More money is laundered each day, banks really do need to get their act together