Latest post on Left Futures

Bankers in charge of the Treasury

image of a bank card

click for photo credit

With a backdrop of bankers looting the EU’s Treasuries (via a bailout that rivals George Bush’s TARP) let us consider one of the most significant Lib Dem-Con cabinet appointments (and a non-appointment). That of someone who until now was invisible: David Laws the new Chief Secretary to the Treasury.

His Wikipedia profile (updated on the day of his elevation, and before he had taken up his ministerial responsibilities) depicts him as the man that speaks for his party on matters relating to kiddie-winkies and families and, no doubt, motherhood and apple pie.  He is also commended for his conciliatory role in negotiating the Scottish Parliament coalition.

No mention here of his real background.

For, according to ePolitix, David Laws was once Vice President of JP Morgan and Co and based in the United States, before becoming Managing Director of Barclays de Zoete Wedd in 1992.

Now, in my book the most obvious candidate for the job of Chancellor, or Chief Secretary to the Treasury,  was surely Vince Cable, a man credited for his prescience in predicting the financial crisis, respected for his ongoing analysis of that crisis and regarded as a “scourge of City ‘fat cats’.”

Why was he shunted across to the toothless Department of Business, Innovation and Skills? And why was a man who until now has had absolutely no record of speaking out on the financial crisis, elevated to a powerful post at the Treasury?

Could it be that Vince Cable is unacceptable to the City? That he was likely to threaten the oligarchic role of the British banking community, and their grip on the UK Treasury?

Evidently so. What else can explain the Financial Times’ headline (under a picture of David Laws and the Old Etonian) “Coalition softens stance on banks”.  And the comment that “proposals for banking reform announced by the new coalition government appear to take a much more measured approach to the task of reshaping Britain’s bloated banking sector”.

So be afeared.

While most economists recognise (as does the FT’s Martin Wolf) that “the source of the government debt…. is the past profligacy of large segments of the private sector, and in particular the financial sector.” Yesterday’s Lib Dem-Con coalition statement argued to the contrary. Government debt, according to our new political masters, is the result of “Labour’s financial crisis’ – with the City of London blanked out. This framing of the debate is deliberate, and Labour was profoundly unwise, and irresponsible, for allowing it to pass unchallenged during the election campaign.

This devious framing of the causes of the financial crisis was at the heart of the Conservative election campaign strategy, even while the Tories hid George Osborne away in a cupboard for the full duration of the election campaign. The role of the City of London was completely ignored, and the entire financial crisis laid at the door of the government, and the innocents dependent on, or working for, the public sector.

It was the most dishonourable and deceitful sleight of hand in modern British politics, I would contend.  And sadly, both Labour and too many of the British public bought into this framing of the debate.

So the ground is now laid. Bankers are preparing to move from looting Treasuries in the US and EU – to once again looting the British Treasury.  And as Michael Hudson argues, to shift the burden of taxation from property and finance – back on to Labour.

Less public money spent on welfare and jobs, means more money for bank bailouts.

Labour’s claims for jobs, for healthcare and pensions will be subordinated to claims by the banks “to get fully paid on hundreds of billions of dollars of recklessly bad loans… reduced to junk status.”

With a totally inexperienced and economically inept Old Etonian in charge: with David Laws playing the role of decoy in this proposed Great Bank Robbery, and aided and abetted  by subservient economists, the Treasury remains within the firm grip of Britain’s most powerful oligarchy.

What is at stake is not just ‘savage cuts’ inflicted on the innocent and the vulnerable, shocking though such an injustice will be.

What is at stake is nothing less than Britain’s democracy, and the peoples’ right to control over the nation’s finances.


  1. Georges says:

    It is really rather hard to read any further than the opening line:

    With a backdrop of bankers looting the EU’s Treasuries (via a bailout that rivals George Bush’s TARP)….

    A few questions for the author:

    Q: What precipitated this latest bailout?
    A: Government (Via the serial fraud perp’d by successive Greek -and other- governments)

    Q: Who organised this latest bailout ‘fix’?
    A: Government (via the EU)

    Q: Who is overseeing the latest round of “looting” of treasuries?
    A: Govenment.

    Q: Who failed to stop/recognise the serial abuse of financial fraud regarding fiscal reporting to the ECB/Eurostat?
    A: Government.

    Shall I continue?


  2. stan howard says:

    we must have laws but thankfully not this hypocrite, who has been replaced by a smirking (i cant believe im here) nonentity with no experience, but hey, how hard can it be to say we will not build that hospital, these houses, those schools etc etc.

© 2024 Left Futures | Powered by WordPress | theme originated from PrimePress by Ravi Varma