I support the Bill because there is clearly no sensible alternative. I shall address the principal Tory objection to it, which is their objection to the concept of nationalisation, and their assertions that it will damage Britain's reputation for financial services, and that the fault for all that lies with the Government. Nothing is further from the truth.
The original mess at Northern Rock was caused by the irresponsible and stupid policies of its private sector bosses. When they got into that mess, they turned to other private sector banks and asked them for additional loans. Those banks refused to give Northern Rock those loans because it was such a bad risk. In other words, there was a market failure.
Northern Rock turned to the state and taxpayer to bail it out; to say that that was ironic would be an understatement. It was hypocritical as well. The bank was chaired by Matt Ridley—an old Etonian, like the leader of the Tory party. He is on record as saying"““it is vital we reduce the power and scope of the state.””"
When his bank needed bailing out, the first thing he did was turn to the state. He had to, because his enterprise-culture, old Etonian friends in the City had turned him down in the marketplace.
Banking (Special Provisions) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Frank Dobson
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 19 February 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Banking (Special Provisions) Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
472 c208 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 23:09:19 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_446161
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_446161
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_446161