I'm with Merv on breaking up the banks.
I agree with him that they should not be too big to fail, but i thought his statement that such institutions should not be in the private sector was very interesting. Not the sort of thing he'd be expected to say i'd think.
I take issue with George Osborne jumping on the bandwagon though:
"George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, said: "Mervyn King's speech is powerful and persuasive. His analysis of how the government's system for regulating banks failed and how there has been 'little real reform' since is one I share.""
Osborne is effectively saying 'told you so' even though King does (and consistantly has) disagreed with him. The important thing is the solution, the way forwards, not just criticising.
"Excluding the cost of bank bailouts, net debt was considerably lower at £682.8bn, or 49% of GDP, not high by international standards but well above the government's self-imposed limit of 40%."
Not too bad, the 40% would be nice but is largely meaningless, and not as bad as most (if not all) alternatives.
"The governor is aware, though, that cutting public spending and raising taxes too early could threaten the nascent economic recovery that is likely to be confirmed by growth data for the third quarter due to be released on Friday."
"The Conservatives seized on the borrowing figures, saying they showed the extent of the debt crisis under the present government.
"A responsible government would act immediately to start reducing public spending and bring Britain's deficit down," said Philip Hammond, shadow chief secretary to the Treasury.
"Failure to act will risk interest rate rises, causing the recovery to falter and putting jobs at risk.""
Not so. Far from it. The point is to invest what is needed, where and when it is needed. Just tackling the deficit will open a large trap door under our economy. I personally don't think the Tories would do what they're talking about, they are just grandstanding from the sidelines, which is what being in opposition allows you to do.