Ben Chu: Case for splitting up banks is now unanswerable

 

Share

Do you trust investment bankers? Don't laugh, because faith in the good behaviour of these individuals is the linchpin of the Government's reforms of our financial sector.

First some background. We taxpayers were forced to bail out our bust banks in 2008 because allowing these institutions to collapse would have plunged us into economic chaos. This prompted calls for the Government to split up the banks, separating their ordinary high-street banking arms from their casino trading operations.

The logic was straightforward. Retail banks, which take deposits from ordinary savers and provide credit to households and businesses, provide an essential utility, similar to the water or electricity companies. The state simply cannot allow these vital economic services to be disrupted. The same is not true of the operations of investment bankers, which take massive bets in global capital markets on behalf of themselves and high-rolling clients. The goal of the split was to protect the taxpayer by making it clear that future state rescues, if necessary, would be limited to ordinary savers, removing the de facto government insurance policy for reckless, bonus-driven investment bankers.

Labour said no to the proposal, but the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives, who were then in opposition, signed up. But rather than legislating to mandate a split when they formed the Coalition in 2010, those two parties appointed an independent committee, headed by an economist called John Vickers, to examine the case. And the Vickers Commission stopped well short of recommending a total separation of high street and investment banking. Instead it proposed the creation of a "ring fence" around banks' high-street arms. Ring-fenced banks could remain under the umbrella of the larger institution, but would hold a bigger capital buffer. They would also have some independent directors and face restrictions on what they could do with ordinary depositors' money. Vickers claimed this would achieve all the benefits of a full split but with none of the costs involved in physically separating the operations.

I, along with others, was never convinced. The idea smacked of the internal "Chinese walls" that supposedly stop traders using privileged information gleaned from colleagues in mergers departments to make bets. Anyone who has had any contact with the City of London knows these non-contact rules are generally ignored. And the fear was that cunning bankers would find ways around the ring-fence just as easily. Vickers' proposal seemed to be largely based on the idea the bankers could be trusted to respect the spirit of the new institutional arrangements.

They have already shown that they don't. The banking lobby has succeeded in getting the Chancellor, George Osborne, to water down Vickers. Last month's White Paper permits ring-fenced retail banks to continue selling interest-rate derivatives to their customers – the very toxic products that banks have been conning ordinary businesses into buying.

And now we have the revelation of interest-rate fixing by traders at Barclays. It should now be screamingly obvious that the investment banking world is irredeemably unscrupulous and mendacious. It cannot be trusted. And the Vickers ring-fence simply does not provide credible security for taxpayers. The Coalition parties need to go back to what they promised in opposition. Nothing less than a complete separation of the essential services provided by high-street banks from the corrupt world of the investment bankers will suffice. The credit of these individuals with the British public has been utterly exhausted.

Are they all predators?

Yesterday's outré radicalism is today's conventional wisdom. Ed Miliband gave a speech last year in which he made a distinction between "producer" and "predator" capitalism. The Labour leader said: "Let me tell you what the 21st-century choice is: are you on the side of the wealth creators or the asset strippers? The producers or the predators?"

Many commentators bristled at what they saw as the Labour leader's "anti-business" rhetoric. Others scoffed at the naivety in display. It was simply impossible, they pointed out, for politicians to tell the difference between the two.

Things have changed. This week GlaxoSmithKline was found guilty of bribing doctors to prescribe dangerous antidepressants to children. Last week Barclays was shown to have manipulated interest rates for profit. So did those two firms behave as producers or predators? Perhaps it's not such a terribly difficult distinction to make after all.

b.chu@independent.co.uk

React Now

Latest stories from i100
Have you tried new the Independent Digital Edition apps?
iJobs Job Widget
iJobs General

Selby Jennings: VP/SVP Credit Quant- NY- Investment Bank

Not specified: Selby Jennings: VP/SVP Credit Quant Top tier investment bank i...

Ashdown Group: Senior Marketing Executive- City of London, Old Street

£40000 - £43000 per annum + benefits: Ashdown Group: Senior Marketing Executiv...

Ashdown Group: Marketing Manager

£40000 - £43000 per annum + benefits: Ashdown Group: An international organisa...

Ashdown Group: Internal Recruiter -Rugby, Warwickshire

£25000 - £30000 per annum: Ashdown Group: Internal Recruiter -Rugby, Warwicksh...

Day In a Page

Read Next
 

Errors & Omissions: pours or pores, pulverised, ‘in preference for’ and lists

Guy Keleny
Ed Miliband created a crisis of confidence about himself within Labour when he forgot to mention the deficit in his party conference speech  

The political parties aren't all the same – which means 2015 will be a 'big-choice' election

Andrew Grice
Aren’t you glad you didn’t say that? The worst wince-and-look-away quotes of the year

Aren’t you glad you didn’t say that?

The worst wince-and-look-away quotes of the year
Hollande's vanity project is on a high-speed track to the middle of nowhere

Vanity project on a high-speed track to nowhere

France’s TGV network has become mired in controversy
Sports Quiz of the Year

Sports Quiz of the Year

So, how closely were you paying attention during 2014?
Alexander Armstrong on insulting Mary Berry, his love of 'Bargain Hunt', and life as a llama farmer

Alexander Armstrong on insulting Mary Berry and his love of 'Bargain Hunt'

From Armstrong and Miller to Pointless
Sanchez helps Gunners hold on after Giroud's moment of madness

Sanchez helps Gunners hold on

Olivier Giroud's moment of madness nearly costs them
A Christmas without hope: Fears grow in Gaza that the conflict with Israel will soon reignite

Christmas without hope

Gaza fears grow that conflict with Israel will soon reignite
After 150 years, you can finally visit the grisliest museum in the country

The 'Black Museum'

After 150 years, you can finally visit Britain's grisliest museum
No ho-ho-hos with Nick Frost's badass Santa

No ho-ho-hos with Nick Frost's badass Santa

Doctor Who Christmas Special TV review
Chilly Christmas: Swimmers take festive dip for charity

Chilly Christmas

Swimmers dive into freezing British waters for charity
Veterans' hostel 'overwhelmed by kindness' for festive dinner

Homeless Veterans appeal

In 2010, Sgt Gary Jamieson stepped on an IED in Afghanistan and lost his legs and an arm. He reveals what, and who, helped him to make a remarkable recovery
Isis in Iraq: Yazidi girls killing themselves to escape rape and imprisonment by militants

'Jilan killed herself in the bathroom. She cut her wrists and hanged herself'

Yazidi girls killing themselves to escape rape and imprisonment
Ed Balls interview: 'If I think about the deficit when I'm playing the piano, it all goes wrong'

Ed Balls interview

'If I think about the deficit when I'm playing the piano, it all goes wrong'
He's behind you, dude!

US stars in UK panto

From David Hasselhoff to Jerry Hall
Grace Dent's Christmas Quiz: What are you – a festive curmudgeon or top of the tree?

Grace Dent's Christmas Quiz

What are you – a festive curmudgeon or top of the tree?
Nasa planning to build cloud cities in airships above Venus

Nasa planning to build cloud cities in airships above Venus

Planet’s surface is inhospitable to humans but 30 miles above it is almost perfect