Turning Brown's happier mood against him

JONNY

Now let's hope Cameron will follow suit.
And put some bite and venom into this week's PMQ.
Back the measures if you must. Just so long as you get your fangs into the bottom of the Measurer.

James

I quite agree that appearing smug and self-congratulatory at the moment is grotesque. However I am still waiting for Osborn and co to tell me what they would have done differently over the previous ten years. Would they have told banks how much they could lend and to whom? Would they put a cap on how much debt individual citizens could rack up? Of course not. They'd have done nothing different apart having gone further down the deregulatory route started by Thatcher in 1986.

Its about time our Opposition stopped sticking their tongues out and pointing fingers and started to act like a Government in waiting by telling us what they would do differently.

BrianSJ

James
Ask Derek Draper to dig you out all the statements by Osborn and co where they have done just that. The BBC, being the PR branch of the Labour party, may not have brought them to your attention, but they are there.
While you are there, have another read at Gordon's 1997 budget speech.

Travis Bickle

Since when did any opposition party have to give a running commentary on what they would do about every issue outside of an election campaign? About as irrelevant as the average football fan opining what they would do about Lampard and Gerrard.

Mel Blake

The Tories appear inept and immature at present and really must get a grip.

Diana

James - Ken Clarke is on the record about all even through the Blair years. The words fell on deaf ears and the media, for the most part, did not choose to investigate further.
And he was not the only Tory..

RobertD

While the regulatory framework put in place by Brown was, with hindsight, weaker than necessary, the real failure has been in the operation of the regulatory mechanisms that existed. The focus, funding and leadership of the FSA was dreadful, worrying too much about government money laundering and anti terrorism requirments and too little about bank balance sheets and the emergence of entities like hedge funds and special purpose vehicles whose main intent was to do banking like activities but outside of many of the regulatory requirements. Bank shareholders (increaingly passive fund managers and hedge funds) failed to hold boards to account. The bonus culture, originally designed for the very good purpose of making the cost base of banks more flexible in line with profitability, became abused.

Much good work was done to produce globally consistent standards for the capital adequacy of banks (Basel 20 and on the international accounting standards for valuation of assets. However their development took so long that by the time they came to be applied the creation of exotic assets and hiding of risk was widespread. Their introduction finally showed the world just how out of control the situation was.... hence the implosion.

The real lesson from this debacle is not that a whole new raft of regulation is required, but that serious attention needs to be paid to the enforcement of the regulatory mechanisms that we have already. Real bank supervisors with experience and independence not box tickers. Boards responsible to shareholders and making management conform to best practice rather than turning a blind eye and off to the golf course. Finally allowing short selling so that shareholders who take and interest in their banking investments can get a message to the banks that they are on the wrong track quickly and painfully.

What we don't need is banks run by civil servants and political appointees. That way lies dammnation and depression.

CS

Mel, if they're not saying anything, how can they appear immature?

Sounds like a cut n paste criticism to me.

Bagehot

I'd rather hear an alternative economic policy from Osborne. I'm also curious how this stacks up with the 'bipartisan' approach Cameron is meant to have promised.

Very juvenile attack line from a very juvenile politician. Osborne seems to be enjoying this even more than Brown. Cheap. And, coming from the man who went missing during the Northern Rock fiasco, two-faced.

James

Travis, if that is your real name, the short answer is that of course no opposition can give a running commentary on every issue. But this isn't council recycling or problems with 'elf and safety - its the biggest financial meltdown ever!!

I maintain that it is irresponsible for George Osborne et al to blame Brown for everything when he would have done no different if Chancellor himself and has no new ideas now while the Brown/ Darling plan is lauded around the globe. His ES article is just clutching at straws.

David

"Very juvenile attack line from a very juvenile politician."

So you think it's okay for Brown to milk his own mistakes to his political advantage, and make jokes about the economy collapsing? Just checking.

Nicholas

There may be a strategy of keeping their powder dry and I won't comment on the wisdom or otherwise of that in the present situation. But whenever I see shadow ministers speaking or writing in the media, which is frankly not very often, they come across as lazy. They seem to be oblivious of what is at stake, lack aggression and an attacking spirit - believing that the simple truth is enough. Against Labour it isn't. Their vocabulary is also flawed; they seem incapable of injecting the consistently memorable soundbites necessary to knock down Labour's incredible house of cards. They are too conciliatory, too determined not to say anything which might cause offence or spark a media bonfire. Granted, part of the reason for this must be the media bias, now worse than ever.

Alan Duncan strikes me as the laziest of them all. On TV his presence is glowering, aloof and reticent.

George Osborne suffers from an unfortunate youthful appearance and voice which makes it all too easy to cast him as a whining public schoolboy. This overshadows much of what he has to say with the GBP so let's hope his writing has a more profound impact. Somehow I doubt it.

The Tories are not moving with the rapidly changing times. They are pursuing a "what went wrong in 1997" type campaign. It is now 2008. Andy Coulson needs sacking and they need to find their Campbell and Mandelson. The attacks on Brown's nazi government should be relentless, undermining and memorable. They need a simple narrative. It's not there.

Paul B

James,I hope the GO will not mind , but I will answer you question on his behalf. Are you sitting down, and ready to hear the truth, good, then I will begin.

1/ He wouldn`t` have screwed everyones pension scheme (save his client state public pensions) by messing with the tax dividend credit pension schemes , there by causing a double whammy on pensions- asset price reduction and real money reductions. He has caused more pain to more pensioners than Bob Maxwell- co-incidentally also a Labour MP- start seeing a course of conduct here?

2/ He would not have messed around with inflation rate figures to such an extent, the MPC would set unrealistically low interests, which has fueled the debt explosion (note not irresponsible bankers. The market was skewed by Brown, the market wasn't wrong, Brown was. Brown then binged on the tax receipts he received when the borrowing was subsequently spent. He was morally bankrupt dealer of destruction, I cannot stomach him moralizing about irresponsible bankers, he should look to him- Satan heal thyself.

3/He would not have our sold Gold reserves at ridiculously low levels.

4/He would not have borrowed as much money as Brown has leaving as vulnerable to the whirlwind now sweeping us.

I am sure many coffee housers can add to list, but I am to angry to continue. The smug , supercilious, crass, incompetent,pompous cretin has with his 6th form Trotskyite, tax tax tax and spend spend spend policies like there is no tomorrow, brought this country to its knees. He and his policies have saddled the country with an ever increasing debt, that our great grandchildren are going to be paying back in probably in 70year or more years time. The thought of that makes me rage, the shame, that a government of any sorts could do this , other than for defense of realm, its truly appalling and the man sits there grinning and cracking joked. What I think about him is unprintable. Sheer & utter utter contempt.

oldtimer

Bank failures are not a laughing matter as Brown seemed to think the other day. No doubt there is a place for gallows humour at a time like this - but not from the Prime Minister.

We have witnessed a system failure, for which the government is responsible. Responsible ministers (ie Brown among them) should fall on their swords like the bank chiefs. Seeking to blame it all on global/US forces is feeble and dishonest.

James

Calm down Paul, you'll mess your M&S knickers.

With the benefit of hindsight that's the beginnings of a fine list of previous financial failures. If its all the same, I'll wait till I hear Osborne say it himself rather than relying on you putting words in his mouth.

It also doesn't actually say anything that he WOULD have done, which is what I'm looking for. Would he have capped City bonuses? Would he have dictated personal borrowing levels? Would he have stopped self-cert mortgages? Would he have taken any of the measures that we can all see now, would have averted the banking crisis - if indeed any action would have been able to stop it? The answer is no he wouldn't. Which is what makes his criticisms invalid and irresponsible

David C

What would the Conservatives have done?

"With the removal of banking control to the Financial Services Authority it is difficult to see how and whether the Bank remains, as it surely must, responsible for ensuring the liquidity of the banking system and preventing systemic collapse.

The process of setting up the FSA may cause regulators to take their eye off the ball, while spivs and crooks have a field day."

(Peter Lilley, November 1997)

They would not have created the conditions that allowed this mess to fester.
(Apologies for the quote and acknowledgements to Scott@Political Betting)

Dean

The crisis will benefit Cameron in all but the very short term, as it vindicates his entire strategy of steering the Tories away from laissez faire economics. The continued embrace, by some sections of the party, of free market fundamentalism has been the single biggest stumbling block to restoring the party's credibility in the eyes of many voters, who worry that the less compassionate side of Conservatism will start to reassert itself if/when the Tories are back in power. Now, as George Osborne wrote this morning, laissez faire is dead and the debtate, going forward, will be about who is best placed to manage a broadly capitalist economy in a way that protects the public interest without stifling enterprise and innovation. This is an argument Labour cannot win, as the political fall out from banking crisis will embolden the trade unions and almost certainly cause the party to lurch to the left (a development Brown will be powerless to prevent).

Cameron and Osborne are playing it right tactically, in my view. They need to avoid sounding too shrill or party political, at a time when the public expects politicians to put the national interest first, but equally they need to remind voters who got us into this mess in the first place. You can't have an asset price bubble unless something has gone seriously wrong with macro-economic policy, and ultimately the banks are not responsible for that (even if they have been reckless in their lending policies).

TrevorsDen

"I am still waiting for Osborn and co to tell me what they would have done differently over the previous ten years" - well various people have answered your fatuous question.

I am not sure the Tories would have just given away and lost the proceeds from the G3 auctions either - I would have invested it in faster internet and who knows what else - a real windfall wasted.

Brown let spending rip and let regulation go hang.

RoberD -- The FSA was not already in existence -- get real, it was CREATED by Brown who simultaneously took away banking regulation from the BoE.
The whole regulatory structure created by Brown FAILED!

CS

***It also doesn't actually say anything that he WOULD have done.***

But Paul's just given you a list of what he would have done:

NOT flogged off gold at the bottom of the market.

NOT screwed the pension schemes.

NOT etc etc

Paul B

What the point is James, under Tory rule , we wouldn`t be where we are now, do you geddit or are you still sniggering at you own fascile comments.

Fraser Allonby

"It is essential that consumer spending is underpinned by investment and industrial growth…some of my predecessors have ignored these signs while others have deluded themselves into believing that growth, however unbalanced, was evidence of their success."

Gordon Brown in 1997. Perhaps he is now realising that economies have cycles, and that by trying to defeat the cycle you end up with colossal distortions. Targeting an inflation rate which bore no relation to people's real expenditure, and pointedly excluded housing costs, led to colossal asset price inflation, and as it bursts we see we have nothing to show for 17 years of economic expansion, no funded pension schemes, no sovereign wealth fund, no lower taxation, just a bloated state addicted to colossal infusions of cash.

JONNY

'Very juvenile attack line from a very juvenile politician'

Maybe Mr Bagehot. Maybe.
Quite a few of us think Crafty Ken would do a better job.

But the Opposition has to hold Brown to account for the fact that our bursting credit bubble - reckoned per capita both in plastic and bricks and mortar - is the most grotesquely pumped up in Western Europe.
All this has happened in the 11 years under Brown's watch.He alone holds the smoking gun.
What the Tories would have done is pure surmise. We simply cannot know.
Personally I'd like to see them get behind Brown in both senses of that word. And boot him very hard indeed in the said soft portion of his anatomy.
And bugger the party consensus.

David Lindsay

You'll have to come up with someone better than Osborne.

Is he with RBS Coutts, now nationalised? I hope so.

Kram Ekosum

James, you are naturally very bright. But smugness breeds arrogance and subsequent stupidity. JONNY rightly points out that we have no idea what the GO would have done. Quite, he was only 26 yrs old! What will YOU be doing at 26?Goodness knows what fat Ken & Co. had planned. It is self evident that GO is immature but that does not equate with lack of intelligence or integrity. Sadly Nicholas is absolutely correct - the Tories are far too timid, as if they don't have the passion. To be fair to Alan Duncan, maybe the repeated scowling is real anger? Politicians are officially showmen and need to admit as much sooner rather than later. The real questions should be directed at the people these frontmen surround themselves with and whether they truly stand up to scrutiny. Sadly most of these unelected mandarins remain anonymous and the ones who stand in the open lack any serious gravitas.

Sandy Jamieson

No matter what spin is thrown, no matter how many sweetheart comments there are on the BBC, Gordon Brown's hands on this issue are dirty

TGF UKIP

Several thoughts and comments: Firstly, right sort of message but wrong medium. As I constantly point out the Tories national opinion poll leads are largely based on their massive lead in the South East. Labour are now actually leading in the North - does the Evening Standard circulate in northern marginals?

Secondly the attack could have been much better made by biting home on the devastating deficiencies of the FSA a quintessentially New Labour construct, post 97. An FSA which RobertD indicates let the banks go berserk while clamping down on very small businesses like sole trader car dealers who might sell perhaps two cars per month but who were required to become FSA registered, fill in ridiculous forms, pay exhorbitant fees etc all because their used car warranties were insurances.

Thirdly, the point that Nicholas makes and that I make myself so frequently but never, alas, as well as Nicholas does. That is the limp, lame, unprofessional nature of the Tory opposition particularly when compared with Labour pre 97. Blair/Brown/Mandelson and Campbell were Rottweilers, Cameron/Osborne/Hilton and Coulson are poodles.

And that is Britain's current tragedy. She has the worst government faced by the worst opposition ever. And what's most shocking is that Labour, far from being dead and buried, as they should be, still have very real prospects of remaining the largest party in 2010.

MikeC

wow, you go on holiday for one week and come back to find the 'rapid rebuttal' unit in full swing. No dithering there then.

RobertD

TrevorsDen

I am not attempting to defend the performance of the FSA (or the Treaury and the disempowered BoE) merely to point out the problem has not been so much the regulations as the way in which they have been implemented. Wrong people, wrong focus, wrong approach. All conducted by the most fabulous con artist of them all G Brown.