1-20 of 22 results for subject:Banks
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.25 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.005 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Banks
- We searched for
- subject_t:Banks OR subject_t:Banking OR subject_ses:90311
Primary member
X
Cameron of Chipping Norton, Lord
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
Primary member
More
Cameron of Chipping Norton, Lord (22)
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
Statement on the European Council held on 13-14 December 2012.
Statement on the European Council held on 13-14 December 2012.
Lead member
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
Department
Prime Minister
Type
Ministerial statements
Subjects
Armed conflict; Banks; EU internal trade; Economic and monetary union; Economic growth; Politics and government; Regulation; European Council; Syria; EU defence policy; Free trade
Date
17 December 2012
Reference
555 cc565-587
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Statement on the European Council held in Brussels on 28-29 June 2012.
Statement on the European Council held in Brussels on 28-29 June 2012.
Lead member
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
Department
Prime Minister
Type
Ministerial statements
Subjects
Banks; Economic situation; EU budget; Economic and monetary union; Oil; Referendums; UK membership of EU; Sanctions; European Council; Iran; Syria
Date
2 July 2012
Reference
547 cc584-611
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Statement on the outcome of the European Council held in Brussels on 9 December 2011.
Statement on the outcome of the European Council held in Brussels on 9 December 2011.
Lead member
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
Department
Prime Minister
Type
Ministerial statements
Subjects
Banks; EU countries; Financial services; Financial institutions; EU internal trade; EU action; Economic and monetary union; Euro; Referendums; Treaties; Regulation; UK membership of EU; European Council
Date
12 December 2011
Reference
537 c519-55
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Statement on the European Council held in Brussels on 23-24 June 2011.
Statement on the European Council held in Brussels on 23-24 June 2011.
Lead member
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
Department
Prime Minister
Type
Ministerial statements
Subjects
Armed conflict; Banks; EU enlargement; Economic and monetary union; EU economic policy; EU grants and loans; Greece; Politics and government; Public sector debt; Small businesses; Regulation; Croatia; European Council; Syria; Middle East; EU immigration; Libya; European financial stabilisation mechanism
Date
27 June 2011
Reference
530 c615-33
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Statement on the G8 and G20 summits which took place in Canada.
Statement on the G8 and G20 summits which took place in Canada.
Lead member
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
Department
Prime Minister
Type
Ministerial statements
Subjects
Banks; Climate change; Canada; Finance; International assistance; Economic situation; G8; Peacekeeping operations; Taxation; Trade agreements; UN resolutions; Sanctions; Afghanistan; Israel; Palestine; Iran; Middle East; Peace negotiations; North Korea; G20; International economic policy
Date
28 June 2010
Reference
512 c565-84
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
I can tell the right hon. Gentleman one thing that President Obama will not be doing. He will not be putting up national insurance contributions on people earning £19,000 or £20,000 because the country is so bust.
Let me ask the Prime Minister again about the market reaction to his announcements. On Monday, he announced a package to help banking, but since then the Royal Bank of Scotland has lost two thirds of its value, Lloyds TSB has lost half its value, and the pound lost nearly 4 per cent. in one day. Is not one of the problems with the Prime Minister's announcements that there is so little clarity? Let me take one element of what he announced on Monday to support the banking system—only the Prime Minister could laugh at those plummeting prices. Can he confirm that he announced an insurance scheme for toxic assets without saying what he is insuring, what the premiums are, what the exposure is, or how long it will last? Is that not a staggering lack of detail?
I can tell the right hon. Gentleman one thing that President Obama will not be doing. He will not be putting up national insurance contributions on people earning £19,000 or £20,000 because the country is so bust.
Let me ask the Prime Minister again about the market reaction to his announcements. On Monday, he announced a package to help banking, but since then the Royal Bank of Scotland has lost two thirds of its value, Lloyds TSB has lost half its value, and the pound lost nearly 4 per cent. in one day. Is not one of the problems with the Prime Minister's announcements that there is so little clarity? Let me take one element of what he announced on Monday to support the banking system—only the Prime Minister could laugh at those plummeting prices. Can he confirm that he announced an insurance scheme for toxic assets without saying what he is insuring, what the premiums are, what the exposure is, or how long it will last? Is that not a staggering lack of detail?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
21 January 2009
I should explain to the right hon. Gentleman—and he has the benefit now of a new shadow shadow Chancellor to help him on his way—[Laughter.] I should explain that when markets fail and banks are unable to do the job for which they are intended, the only agency that can step in is the Government. If the Government do not take action, no one else will. That is the lesson that has been learned in every single country of the world, and that is the lesson that President Obama said yesterday is the work that will be pursued in America.
On the action that we have taken on banks themselves, every guarantee that we have made is set against the banks' assets. In the insurance policies that we have signed there is a fee, and every loan is to be paid for as a result of the credit that we have extended. The right hon. Gentleman referred to the asset purchase scheme, and what we actually announced on Monday was a process by which we will talk to the banks in individual detail, and we will look at their assets and liabilities with them. We will therefore conduct the audit of the banks' finances that he says is necessary. We will report back to the House on the nature of the insurance scheme that we agree, and the risks will be shared with the banks in the scheme. It is similar to schemes that are being adopted in other countries, and which may continue to be adopted in America and elsewhere. I believe that it is the right thing to do, but the right hon. Gentleman must decide which central proposition he agrees with—that the recession must take its course, or that, when markets fail, Governments must step in.
Subjects
Banks; Finance; Economic policy
Date
21 January 2009
Reference
486 c745-6
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Let me tell the right hon. Gentleman something that the Mayor of London, the former Chancellor and I all agree about: the Prime Minister is making a complete mess of the economy. When it comes to these great infrastructure projects, who just put back the carrier programme? Who cancelled the widening of the motorways? It was this Government, because they have run out of money.
The Prime Minister gave me absolutely no answer to my question about the insurance scheme. People want detail because they want to know that their money is being put to good use. This is not the first time that the Prime Minister has announced measures to bail out the banks. In the first bank bail out, he put £37 billion of taxpayers' money into the banks. He said that the shares that the Government bought would"““grow in value over the next period of time””."
Will he confirm that, as matters stand, the taxpayer has actually lost more than £20 billion?
Let me tell the right hon. Gentleman something that the Mayor of London, the former Chancellor and I all agree about: the Prime Minister is making a complete mess of the economy. When it comes to these great infrastructure projects, who just put back the carrier programme? Who cancelled the widening of the motorways? It was this Government, because they have run out of money.
The Prime Minister gave me absolutely no answer to my question about the insurance scheme. People want detail because they want to know that their money is being put to good use. This is not the first time that the Prime Minister has announced measures to bail out the banks. In the first bank bail out, he put £37 billion of taxpayers' money into the banks. He said that the shares that the Government bought would"““grow in value over the next period of time””."
Will he confirm that, as matters stand, the taxpayer has actually lost more than £20 billion?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
21 January 2009
I was very grateful for the support that the Opposition party gave to the recapitalisation of the banks three months ago. I suppose that I should not be surprised that the minute there is a difficulty, it withdraws its support from the right proposal. The recapitalisation of the banks was the right thing to do. The right hon. Gentleman has no other policy that would replace that policy. We are right to continue to support the banks so that they can lend to people in this economy, and the measures that we have announced this week are the right measures to take us forward.
The right hon. Gentleman is completely isolated from every major party in every country in the world. Every country understands that when the private sector and the markets fail, and particularly when banks fail, the Government have a duty to act. He wants to cut public investment while others want to increase it. He wants to withdraw help from the unemployed while we want to give it. As far as the banks are concerned, he does not know what his policy is because it changes from one day to the next.
Subjects
Banks; Finance; Economic policy
Date
21 January 2009
Reference
486 c746-7
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
The Prime Minister talks about being isolated, but does he not realise that he is the only person in the country who thinks he is doing a good job? [Interruption.] There was not exactly a roar of approval from behind him. The whole point about the first recapitalisation was that it was meant to get the banks lending. It has failed to do that, as even the Prime Minister has admitted. Let me put the question again. The shares were worth £37 billion. They are now worth less than £17 billion. Will he confirm—it is simple maths—that, as things stand, the taxpayer has lost more than £20 billion?
The Prime Minister talks about being isolated, but does he not realise that he is the only person in the country who thinks he is doing a good job? [Interruption.] There was not exactly a roar of approval from behind him. The whole point about the first recapitalisation was that it was meant to get the banks lending. It has failed to do that, as even the Prime Minister has admitted. Let me put the question again. The shares were worth £37 billion. They are now worth less than £17 billion. Will he confirm—it is simple maths—that, as things stand, the taxpayer has lost more than £20 billion?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
21 January 2009
The point of the recapitalisation of the banks—[Interruption.] I am sorry that the Conservatives do not want to understand economics. The purpose of the recapitalisation of the banks—[Hon. Members: ““Answer!””] They should really grow up and face up to the big issues. The point of the recapitalisation of the banks was to stop them collapsing. If we had taken the right hon. Gentleman's advice and not put our stake into the banks, they would have collapsed. Thousands more people would have been worse off and thousands more businesses would have suffered. As a result of what we have done no saver has lost any money. What is his alternative to the capitalisation of the banks?
Subjects
Banks; Finance; Economic policy
Date
21 January 2009
Reference
486 c747
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
The fiscal stimulus has nothing to do with saving the businesses that are going bust and that need lending from banks. The Prime Minister talks about the loan guarantee scheme. Does he know what percentage of loans to business the loan guarantee scheme covers? Does he know? It is 0.2 per cent.: that is how big it is. I know that the Prime Minister has been around the world boasting about his recapitalisation scheme, so he is reluctant to change it but, for the good of the economy and our businesses, it has got to change.
If it is all going so well—if it is all going so swimmingly—why did the Council of Mortgage Lenders say this yesterday? It said:"““The government needs to decide on its key priority. The tug of war with lenders being pulled in every direction at once needs to end.””"
Government policy, the council says, is ““conflicting and incoherent””. Why does it think that Government policy is conflicting and incoherent?
The fiscal stimulus has nothing to do with saving the businesses that are going bust and that need lending from banks. The Prime Minister talks about the loan guarantee scheme. Does he know what percentage of loans to business the loan guarantee scheme covers? Does he know? It is 0.2 per cent.: that is how big it is. I know that the Prime Minister has been around the world boasting about his recapitalisation scheme, so he is reluctant to change it but, for the good of the economy and our businesses, it has got to change.
If it is all going so well—if it is all going so swimmingly—why did the Council of Mortgage Lenders say this yesterday? It said:"““The government needs to decide on its key priority. The tug of war with lenders being pulled in every direction at once needs to end.””"
Government policy, the council says, is ““conflicting and incoherent””. Why does it think that Government policy is conflicting and incoherent?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
10 December 2008
The Council of Mortgage Lenders has just supported our proposal to deal with repossessions in the mortgage market, something that not even the Conservative party was able to support. We are taking the action that is necessary. I am sorry to have to teach the right hon. Gentleman what an economy is about, but if we are putting money into the small business loan guarantee system, if we are putting money into export credit, if we are putting public money into supporting businesses through a difficult period by deferring income tax and corporation tax and national insurance and VAT, we are using taxpayers' money rightly to help small businesses.
Unfortunately, the difference between our two parties is that the right hon. Gentleman would do absolutely nothing and let the recession run its course, while we are prepared to take the action that is necessary but accept that it costs money. It is no good him complaining about extra borrowing if he is not prepared to take the action that is necessary to help small businesses.
Subjects
Banks; Finance
Date
10 December 2008
Reference
485 c528
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Well, it is now on the record. The Prime Minister is so busy talking about saving the world that he has forgotten about the businesses in the country that he is supposed to be governing. All over the country there are businesses that have had interest rates increased and overdrafts restricted. I have one here: a business in Derbyshire whose overdraft facility was restricted even though its order book was full, and which has had to lay off 11 people as a result.
This recapitalisation scheme is not working. It needs to change if the banks are to start lending again. The Prime Minister keeps saying that everyone in the world has copied it, but no one has copied the details. He is lending to the banks at 12 per cent. and expecting them to lend out at 6 per cent. Other countries are not copying that, even though he thinks he is saving the world. Is that not one of the things that need to change, and change now?
Well, it is now on the record. The Prime Minister is so busy talking about saving the world that he has forgotten about the businesses in the country that he is supposed to be governing. All over the country there are businesses that have had interest rates increased and overdrafts restricted. I have one here: a business in Derbyshire whose overdraft facility was restricted even though its order book was full, and which has had to lay off 11 people as a result.
This recapitalisation scheme is not working. It needs to change if the banks are to start lending again. The Prime Minister keeps saying that everyone in the world has copied it, but no one has copied the details. He is lending to the banks at 12 per cent. and expecting them to lend out at 6 per cent. Other countries are not copying that, even though he thinks he is saving the world. Is that not one of the things that need to change, and change now?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
10 December 2008
The right hon. Gentleman forgets that in addition to recapitalising the banks, we have set up the small business loan guarantee scheme with an extra £1 billion. That would not be possible if we took the advice of the Conservative party. We have put an extra £1 billion into export credits for small businesses, which would not be possible if we took the advice of the Conservative party. We are getting £4 billion from the European Investment Bank. Four banks in Britain are already using that scheme, which will enable money to flow to small businesses. And, at the same time, the Inland Revenue—Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs—is saying to people that we will defer payments of VAT, national insurance and income tax, and corporation tax, to enable them to have the cash flow that is necessary.
So we are taking the measures that are necessary. Unfortunately, to do that one has to be able to put a fiscal injection into the economy. Unfortunately, the Conservative party opposes the extra investment that is needed. Unfortunately, the Conservative party is still clinging to the failed policies of the 1980s.
Subjects
Banks; Finance
Date
10 December 2008
Reference
485 c527-8
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
I join the Prime Minister in paying tribute to Lance Corporal David Wilson. His family, including his fiancée, Michelle, and his young daughter, Poppy, have suffered a devastating loss, and the whole House will want to send its condolences to them.
I am going to ask the Prime Minister again about the need to get banks lending to businesses. Putting taxpayers' money into the banks was something supported by all parts of the House in order, yes, to rescue the banking system, but as the Governor of the Bank of England says, the purpose of recapitalisation was not"““merely to protect the banks””,"
but to ensure that"““the flow of lending to the real economy could continue at normal rates””."
Does the Prime Minister accept that on those terms, his recapitalisation has failed? When is he going to change it?
I join the Prime Minister in paying tribute to Lance Corporal David Wilson. His family, including his fiancée, Michelle, and his young daughter, Poppy, have suffered a devastating loss, and the whole House will want to send its condolences to them.
I am going to ask the Prime Minister again about the need to get banks lending to businesses. Putting taxpayers' money into the banks was something supported by all parts of the House in order, yes, to rescue the banking system, but as the Governor of the Bank of England says, the purpose of recapitalisation was not"““merely to protect the banks””,"
but to ensure that"““the flow of lending to the real economy could continue at normal rates””."
Does the Prime Minister accept that on those terms, his recapitalisation has failed? When is he going to change it?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
10 December 2008
The first point of recapitalisation was to save banks that would otherwise have collapsed. We not only saved the world—[Laughter.]—saved the banks and led the way—[Interruption.] We not only saved the banks—[Interruption.]
...Not only did we work with other countries to save the world's banking—[Interruption.] Not only did we work with other countries to save the world's banking system, but not one depositor actually lost any money in Britain. That is the first thing. The second thing is to get the banks into a position in which they can resume lending, and that is why interest rates have come down by 3.5 per cent.—something that the Opposition said was not possible, but which actually happened. The third thing to do is to work to remove all the barriers to interest rates and to the lending of money by the banks, and that is what we are doing in discussion with the banks now. The Opposition may not like the fact that we led the world in saving the banking system, but we did.
Subjects
Banks; Finance
Date
10 December 2008
Reference
485 c526-7
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
The difference between us and the Prime Minister is that while he thinks he is saving the world, we are talking about businesses in the real world in the British economy. The Governor of the Bank of England says:"““The single most pressing challenge to domestic economic policy is to get the banking system to resume lending””."
If the Prime Minister was not wasting so much time and everyone's money on his pointless VAT cut, he could have spent more time on this.
Just as the Government supported lending between the banks, is it not now time to underwrite lending to businesses? Is that not the way to keep them afloat and to keep people in work? Will the Prime Minister now finally accept our proposal for a national loan guarantee scheme to make sure that happens?
The difference between us and the Prime Minister is that while he thinks he is saving the world, we are talking about businesses in the real world in the British economy. The Governor of the Bank of England says:"““The single most pressing challenge to domestic economic policy is to get the banking system to resume lending””."
If the Prime Minister was not wasting so much time and everyone's money on his pointless VAT cut, he could have spent more time on this.
Just as the Government supported lending between the banks, is it not now time to underwrite lending to businesses? Is that not the way to keep them afloat and to keep people in work? Will the Prime Minister now finally accept our proposal for a national loan guarantee scheme to make sure that happens?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
10 December 2008
The right hon. Gentleman is refusing to spend any taxpayers' money in helping us out of this difficulty. As for his rejection of the VAT cut we are giving to consumers to enable them to spend, I hope he will ask the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee to apologise, when saying that he was against the VAT cut, for asking:"““How will it help the poor to give them a few pence off consumer items they don't need?””"
If ever that was uncaring Conservatism—the right hon. Gentleman should ask the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee to apologise.
Subjects
Banks; Finance
Date
10 December 2008
Reference
485 c528-9
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
The Prime Minister is on the wrong side of mathematics. The loan guarantee scheme, worth £1 billion, covers 0.2 per cent. of business lending. He cannot accuse us of doing nothing on a day when we are proposing a multi-billion pound scheme to get business lending again.
But let us take a moment to look at the Prime Minister's record. What did he do to put money aside for a rainy day? Nothing. What did he do to stop the fastest rise in unemployment for 17 years? Nothing. And what has he done to get real credit moving in the real economy? Absolutely nothing. He said he would abolish—
...Wait a minute—the Prime Minister can save the world in a few moments if he likes. He said he would abolish boom and bust; he has brought this country to the brink of bankruptcy and the deepest recession of the G7. Is not the person responsible him?
The Prime Minister is on the wrong side of mathematics. The loan guarantee scheme, worth £1 billion, covers 0.2 per cent. of business lending. He cannot accuse us of doing nothing on a day when we are proposing a multi-billion pound scheme to get business lending again.
But let us take a moment to look at the Prime Minister's record. What did he do to put money aside for a rainy day? Nothing. What did he do to stop the fastest rise in unemployment for 17 years? Nothing. And what has he done to get real credit moving in the real economy? Absolutely nothing. He said he would abolish—
...Wait a minute—the Prime Minister can save the world in a few moments if he likes. He said he would abolish boom and bust; he has brought this country to the brink of bankruptcy and the deepest recession of the G7. Is not the person responsible him?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
10 December 2008
rose—
...Yesterday, the leader of the Conservative party said he would spend no more money; he said he would do nothing more through more finance to help people. He then went on to say he would cut spending in 2010; that means cutting spending on the health service, education and other public services. The Conservative party enters 2009 with exactly the same policies it had in the 1980s. It will say anything to disguise the fact that it will do nothing; that is the Conservative party we know, and it is not fit for Government.
Subjects
Banks; Finance
Date
10 December 2008
Reference
485 c529-30
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Why cannot the Prime Minister answer the question about our national loan guarantee scheme? It is a fully worked-through proposal that could help business now. The CBI has welcomed it, as have the Institute of Directors and the Federation of Small Businesses, and The Guardian newspaper today—[Interruption.] Well, The Guardian gets Government leaks without anyone being arrested. The Guardian said:"““The Conservatives have been advocating a national loans guarantee scheme that the Treasury may be trying to adapt””."
So, on the day the Prime Minister is copying our welfare reforms—we will have a statement on that in a minute—will he swallow his pride and admit that he needs to copy our proposal for a national loan guarantee scheme? Is that not the way to get business trading and to keep Britain working?
Why cannot the Prime Minister answer the question about our national loan guarantee scheme? It is a fully worked-through proposal that could help business now. The CBI has welcomed it, as have the Institute of Directors and the Federation of Small Businesses, and The Guardian newspaper today—[Interruption.] Well, The Guardian gets Government leaks without anyone being arrested. The Guardian said:"““The Conservatives have been advocating a national loans guarantee scheme that the Treasury may be trying to adapt””."
So, on the day the Prime Minister is copying our welfare reforms—we will have a statement on that in a minute—will he swallow his pride and admit that he needs to copy our proposal for a national loan guarantee scheme? Is that not the way to get business trading and to keep Britain working?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
10 December 2008
Again, I have got to teach the right hon. Gentleman something. We have already got a business loan guarantee scheme; it is worth £1 billion and it was announced as an extension in the Budget. If the Conservatives have not realised that, they can be of no help to small businesses in their constituencies. On top of that, we have an export credit scheme; on top of that, we have deferred expenditure on VAT and income tax; and on top of that, we have the European Investment Bank scheme. I just said in answer to the first question put to me that we will do more in the next few days because we want to do everything we can to help the economy move forward, but that cannot be done without being prepared to put the injection of money into the economy, and if the Conservatives stand for the policies of the 1980s and 1990s—when they did nothing as the unemployed and small businesses went to the wall—and do not allow the extra expenditure, they are on the wrong side of history.
Subjects
Banks; Finance
Date
10 December 2008
Reference
485 c529
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
May I start by thanking the Prime Minister for agreeing to the full, independent inquiry into baby P that I asked for here last week? This was never about politics; it was about getting to the truth, and I am grateful that we are to have that inquiry.
Does the Prime Minister agree that bank reconstruction, which we all support, has not yet had the desired effect, in terms of ensuring that lower interest rates are passed on to businesses, and that credit is genuinely freed up?
May I start by thanking the Prime Minister for agreeing to the full, independent inquiry into baby P that I asked for here last week? This was never about politics; it was about getting to the truth, and I am grateful that we are to have that inquiry.
Does the Prime Minister agree that bank reconstruction, which we all support, has not yet had the desired effect, in terms of ensuring that lower interest rates are passed on to businesses, and that credit is genuinely freed up?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
19 November 2008
First, on baby P, I think there is unity and common ground in this House on the fact that we have got to act quickly on the report on Haringey that is to come, and that Lord Laming’s work round the country is essential. We will look at what he says very carefully indeed. It is in all our interests that where there is failure, we change the system, and where people are to blame for failures, they are held accountable.
As for the banking system, I think that we were right to recapitalise the banks. This act has now been followed in every country of the world. The issue now is how the banks will resume funding to small businesses and home owners, and we are in discussion with the banks—every one of the banks—about, first of all, how HBOS-Lloyds TSB and Royal Bank of Scotland can achieve their promise that their lending and marketing of lending activity will be at the 2007 level, and, secondly, how all the banks can resume funding. We will bring forward proposals very soon indeed.
Subjects
Children; Bank services; Banks; Finance; Protection
Date
19 November 2008
Reference
483 c226
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
I am grateful for what the Prime Minister says about the tragic case in Haringey and the need for proper accountability and responsibility, and there will be all-party support for that.
On the issue of talking to the banks, let me give the Prime Minister two specific cases that we have been in touch about this morning. First, a manufacturer in Lancashire, employing 120 people, is now being charged £16,000 for a modest overdraft facility. Even more dramatically, a small business in Leicestershire wrote to us saying that it had never breached its banking covenants and never exceeded its overdraft limit, yet its overdraft facility had been withdrawn and cheques have bounced. Do not such cases show that what has been done so far, which we support, has not yet worked properly, and that we need to do more on the credit side to ensure that such small businesses are not strangled?
I am grateful for what the Prime Minister says about the tragic case in Haringey and the need for proper accountability and responsibility, and there will be all-party support for that.
On the issue of talking to the banks, let me give the Prime Minister two specific cases that we have been in touch about this morning. First, a manufacturer in Lancashire, employing 120 people, is now being charged £16,000 for a modest overdraft facility. Even more dramatically, a small business in Leicestershire wrote to us saying that it had never breached its banking covenants and never exceeded its overdraft limit, yet its overdraft facility had been withdrawn and cheques have bounced. Do not such cases show that what has been done so far, which we support, has not yet worked properly, and that we need to do more on the credit side to ensure that such small businesses are not strangled?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
19 November 2008
I have said all along that the banks have got to accept their responsibilities. We have done what we can; they have to accept their responsibilities to act in a responsible and fair manner. I shall be happy to look at the individual cases to which the right hon. Gentleman has referred, but I have to say that we have expanded the small firms loan guarantee system to small businesses, that we have drawn on a European facility that could be worth up to £4 billion to help small businesses, that we already monitor what the banks are actually doing in every individual area, and that we will continue to monitor their work very closely. I have to say also that despite the Opposition’s predictions, the Bank of England has also reduced interest rates, and that must flow through to small businesses, as it has to home owners.
Subjects
Bank services; Banks; Finance; Small businesses
Date
19 November 2008
Reference
483 c226
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
The Prime Minister says that we have done what we can. My question is, do not we need to go ahead and consider doing more? Is the Prime Minister considering—[Hon. Members: ““Doing more?””] Yes. This is about small businesses in the real world that are struggling and want to know how we are going to get credit moving again. Is the Prime Minister prepared to consider more direct measures to get lending to business restarted, including the establishment of new institutions to underwrite lending, so that businesses can get the money that they need? At the same time, can he tell the House whether he is contemplating any further taxpayer investment in the banking system?
The Prime Minister says that we have done what we can. My question is, do not we need to go ahead and consider doing more? Is the Prime Minister considering—[Hon. Members: ““Doing more?””] Yes. This is about small businesses in the real world that are struggling and want to know how we are going to get credit moving again. Is the Prime Minister prepared to consider more direct measures to get lending to business restarted, including the establishment of new institutions to underwrite lending, so that businesses can get the money that they need? At the same time, can he tell the House whether he is contemplating any further taxpayer investment in the banking system?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
19 November 2008
The reason why I mentioned what we have already done was to remind the House of the action that has been taken, which the Opposition unfortunately opposed. The issue now is providing real help—as I said early on—for small businesses and for families, and, to make that real help possible, there will have to be some fiscal expansion. If the Leader of the Opposition is now telling me that he will support that fiscal expansion to make it possible, that is a change from yesterday, but a welcome change, indeed. We will take all the measures that are necessary to help small businesses get the loan capital that they need, but the Opposition are going to have to be consistent: if they are asking for fiscal action now, that is the opposite of what they were doing yesterday.
Subjects
Bank services; Banks; Finance; Small businesses
Date
19 November 2008
Reference
483 c227
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
No one wants banks to fail, but also no one wants rewards for failure. Taxpayers now have an investment, so taxpayers have an interest, and they will rightly be infuriated if they see their hard-earned money going in bonuses that are rewards for failure. The other thing that the taxpayer will expect is that everything possible will be done to improve the regulatory system. One of the problems is that there is no one in the system who is there to take an overall view of indebtedness in the economy. Will the Prime Minister look with a genuinely open mind at restoring the role of the Bank of the England—the role that it had for decades—of calling time on debt levels in the economy? The regulatory system needs not just the right rules, but strong institutions. Should not the Bank of England be restored to its proper role in this regard, so that this never happens again?
No one wants banks to fail, but also no one wants rewards for failure. Taxpayers now have an investment, so taxpayers have an interest, and they will rightly be infuriated if they see their hard-earned money going in bonuses that are rewards for failure. The other thing that the taxpayer will expect is that everything possible will be done to improve the regulatory system. One of the problems is that there is no one in the system who is there to take an overall view of indebtedness in the economy. Will the Prime Minister look with a genuinely open mind at restoring the role of the Bank of the England—the role that it had for decades—of calling time on debt levels in the economy? The regulatory system needs not just the right rules, but strong institutions. Should not the Bank of England be restored to its proper role in this regard, so that this never happens again?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
8 October 2008
Of course under the new legislation, for which I believe there is now all-party support, the Bank of England will have a statutory role in the supervision of the system. However, I have to remind the right hon. Gentleman that when we came in in 1997, there were seven or eight separate regulators all involved in the system. We co-ordinated that within the Financial Services Authority and we led the world in that way.
As for bonuses, the FSA will be responsible for issuing rules about capital adequacy to firms. It will take into account whether firms are taking excessive risk by rewarding people on the basis of short-term gains, not long-term success. So when the right hon. Gentleman asks what will be done, the answer is that on a case-by-case basis where we capitalise the banks, we will lay down conditions. As for other companies and the rest of the system, the FSA will now be in a position to regulate the capital requirements of firms according to the risk-taking that is involved.
I hear what the right hon. Gentleman says about what he thinks about the irresponsibility of people in the City and some of the adjectives that have been used, but I have to remind him of what he said on the ““Andrew Marr Show””:"““What you won't hear from me this week is sort of easy, cheap lines…beating up…the market system, bashing…financiers.””"
Subjects
Debts; Banks; Bank of England; Economic situation; Regulation
Date
8 October 2008
Reference
480 c270
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Given, as the Prime Minister says, that we are trying to save the banking system not as an end in itself, but to save the wider economy, would he agree that the real test of success of these measures is not just, as he said, whether banks starting to lend to each other, but whether small business can get loans again and whether home owners can get mortgages again? Are they not the real tests that need to be met? Can he explain how he will measure whether they are met?
Given, as the Prime Minister says, that we are trying to save the banking system not as an end in itself, but to save the wider economy, would he agree that the real test of success of these measures is not just, as he said, whether banks starting to lend to each other, but whether small business can get loans again and whether home owners can get mortgages again? Are they not the real tests that need to be met? Can he explain how he will measure whether they are met?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
8 October 2008
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for giving me an opportunity to say, in addition, what we are doing to help small businesses. The key issues for small and medium-sized enterprises are cash flow, and, to some extent, access to finance, as I have just said. They need to be helped through this critical period. Late payment problems, which have intensified, with all firms on average lengthening the time it takes to pay their suppliers, including SMEs, go beyond agreed terms. The Government can ease the situation, and we will help cash flow through prompt payment. The Government have already agreed to move their procurement rules from payments within 30 days to a commitment to pay as soon as possible. In the current climate, we need to go further, with a harder target. We will therefore aim to make SME payments within 10 days. The Government will pick up the cost of that, but it is a small price for greatly increasing cash flow associated with £8 billion of contracts for SMEs.
As I announced last weekend, we propose that the European Investment Bank increase its loans worth up to £4 billion to United Kingdom banks for use by small and medium-sized enterprises. We are now pressing for further additional funding to be advanced, and for UK banks to be able to ensure that they take up the full funding available for SMEs. The Government will, of course, review the impact of any regulatory measures already agreed, but let me make it clear that we are doing, and will do, everything we can to assist SMEs throughout this period. Our restructuring of the banks is designed to ensure that, although it is difficult to achieve, credit lines can remain open to SMEs on a commercial basis. We will not accept that banks should cull their credit lines to eliminate their own exposure to risk, so we will do everything we can to help the 4 million small businesses of this country.
Subjects
Banks; Finance; Economic situation; Mortgages; Loans; Small businesses; Regulation
Date
8 October 2008
Reference
480 c268-9
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Taxpayers are making an enormous investment and potentially have a huge liability. They want their interests to be protected. That should mean no more irresponsible behaviour, no more inappropriate dividend policies and no more indefensible bonus packages. Will the Prime Minister confirm that those will be conditions of the agreement for getting taxpayers' cash? Crucially, how will the conditions be enforced once everyone has signed up?
Taxpayers are making an enormous investment and potentially have a huge liability. They want their interests to be protected. That should mean no more irresponsible behaviour, no more inappropriate dividend policies and no more indefensible bonus packages. Will the Prime Minister confirm that those will be conditions of the agreement for getting taxpayers' cash? Crucially, how will the conditions be enforced once everyone has signed up?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
8 October 2008
Again, I am grateful for the chance to explain how we will move forward the proposal that the Chancellor announced this morning. On the remuneration packages available to executives, it will be a condition of the capitalisation of banks that they accept new conditions attached to executive remuneration. We are in discussion, on a case-by-case basis, with the banks that want to take up the scheme about the level of executive remuneration, especially the bonus system that has caused so much difficulty.
Our aim is to support and reward work, enterprise and responsible risk-taking, but not irresponsible and excessive risk-taking, which has caused so much damage. The Financial Services Authority—[Interruption.] I was asked a question, so I think I should have the chance to answer. The Financial Services Authority will soon publish a consultative document about the danger to company balance sheets if, by excessive risk-taking, some of their executives put those balance sheets and companies at risk. That will form part of its estimate of what capital those companies need.
It is not only a question of the individual banks with which we are dealing having to accept new conditions—there are strings attached and conditions must be met—but throughout the system, the FSA will propose a new way of dealing with executive remuneration, especially bonuses, which will allow it to regulate according to the capital requirements of a company that takes excessive risk.
Subjects
Banks; Finance; Economic situation; Regulation
Date
8 October 2008
Reference
480 c269
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons