Didn’t Ritchie insist that the Co Op Bank was well run by those without banking qualifications?

The City regulator has begun an investigation into the role of former senior directors at the Co-operative Bank.

In the wake of the bank’s £1.5bn capital shortfall, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) is investigating whether there is enough evidence to take action against former directors, including Rev. Paul Flowers, the ex-chairman.

The action could lead to lifetime City bans or sizeable fines were any wrongdoing to be proven.

The regulator, led by chief executive Martin Wheatley, is believed to be focusing on the actions of individuals in the run-up to the shortfall being uncovered in June 2013.

Central to the probe is whether there were any regulatory breaches by the directors in relation to the regulatory capital position of the bank and the way that provisions were accounted for in relation to loan impairments.

And of course we all recall his repeated insistences that the Rev Stephen Green should look long and hard at the morals of what HSBC was doing. Which makes the activities of the Rev Paul Flowers interesting, no?

Now, as it happens, I think hiring rent boys and taking crack are entirely moral activities. If that’s what floats your boat and everyone’s a consenting adult then the activity is, by definition, moral. Might not be legal but it’s moral: at least, morally acceptable.

But that’s not an argument I can imagine Ritchie making. And I have to admit to being very surprised indeed that he hasn’t visited this subject recently. He is, after all, usually quite keen to tell us all what is moral and what is not.

12 comments on “Didn’t Ritchie insist that the Co Op Bank was well run by those without banking qualifications?

  1. The LHTD (thanks SE) has pronounced – denounced, if you will:

    “…sticking to areas of competence is vital”.

    Really! Then why in fucking hell did you defend the practice of appointing directors with no banking qualifications or experience?

  2. “As a member I have been let down”

    Oh, the bank has members does it?

    Of what are you a member Richard; the Co-op Group? Other coops? The Tufty Club?

    But you’re right; you are a member.

  3. “It let itself be used by bondholders who it should have avoided (surely Northern Rock taught that).”

    Oh that’s rich; that really is rich! The failed business blames its investors. I’m supposed to run a business for them, but they let me down.

  4. A standard Ritchie approach is to deflect attention from his own past opinions (proven with the benefit of hindsight to be wrong) and appalling misjudgements (stridently made and defended) by pointing the finger at something else unrelated to his past.

    Unsurprisingly, therefore, Ritchie’s approach to the, em, shortcomings of the (ex) Rev Flowers is to go on the offensive over the Rev Stephen Green, ex-chairman of HSBC. Let’s not forget, this is a bank that performed better recently than any other big bank in the UK, although certainly failed adequately to monitor its US money laundering procedures.

    And, like a gaggle of little ducklings, his fawning troupe of lickspittles follows him.

  5. “The action could lead to lifetime City bans or sizeable fines were any wrongdoing to be proven.2

    Totally off topic, of course, but can’t help but notice – people who mishandle large amounts of money in the City do suffer personal consequences. But those that do so in the public sector don’t.

  6. Haha love the comments. Tim tells the idiot he’s sure there’s a post in the archives saying that banks shouldn’t have bankers on the board. Ritchie denies it. Tim posts the link. Moron then moves the goal posts saying he didn’t mean coke heads. What an utter cunt of a human that man is.

  7. Suspect the difference is that the Rev Green is a professional banker, with the Rev on the side, while Rev Flowers is the reverse.

    Richard of Murphalot naturally likes the one who is not a real businessman.

  8. Got to disagree with you on the crack, Tim. As you yourself say in your very next post:

    We wanted it, we enjoyed it and if there is any blame to be passed around then it is to us, the people who enjoyed the products of which the emissions are a by product.

    How can the same logic not apply to paying for cocaine and the murder rates in Mexico and Colombia?

    Yes, the link is only there because of the illegality and legalising the drug would remove the link. But, as long as the link is there, using the drug is certainly not moral, if you give a damn about the consequences of your actions.

  9. [quote]Suspect the difference is that the Rev Green is a professional banker, with the Rev on the side, while Rev Flowers is the reverse.[/quote]

    I’m not sure I’d regard the Rev Flowers as a professional minister. Professional crack-head possibly.

    That said, it’s all been worth it just for that headline in the Sun describing him as a Crystal Methodist…

  10. It is often said of pompous people that they cannot tell when someone is pulling their leg. I’m sure a Venn Diagram could be drawn to illustrate this.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.