Ritchie solves banking

Unions must be represented on boards.

That\’ll help, eh?

As should depositors.

And that.

Mutualisation needs state support to get it back on its feet.

Oh aye?

Has Ritchie not bothered to look at the Spanish banking system? Where the banks that are falling over are the cajas, the mutuals, with union and depositor representation on the boards, plunged into a nightmare of over lending into the property boom?

He has? He hasn\’t?

And heads need to roll. Whole rafts of senior bankers need to leave the industry: their mentality is corrupt and has to be swept away. There will be decent people who can take their places: have no doubt about it. But it will take leadership from a new type of non-exec director dedicated ti making banking work again that will let this happen. Again, I think such people exist; they’re just the outsiders now.

And yes, I think that means what you think it means. Ritchie, Prem and Colin, Howard, the gang, get to be on the board of directors of the new banks.

To be honest I think I\’d prefer one of my cats to get the job. True, they are prone to licking their arses at inappropriate moments but they don\’t actually stick their heads right in.

19 thoughts on “Ritchie solves banking”

  1. “If they have a better way of running a bank have they tried starting their own?”

    Not fair, you have to get past the FSA rules first. E.g. you need £5m before you can start.

  2. I have no problem with Ritchie and co. starting their own bank, in fact they should certainly go for it if they think they can do better, that is exactly what the entrepreneurial spirit calls for.

    Where I have a problem is that they think it should be a publicly funded sinecure for those ‘right thinking people’ like themselves (i.e. leftist rent seekers).

    In which case Ritchie, go fuck yourself.

  3. James James,

    That is a different argument but one that Dickie could make in parallel. Do the FSA regulations get the balance of protecting the public and protecting the banking industry right? The public have not been protected and the banking industry is expensive to enter to the benefit of the existing businesses.

    What Dickie appears to be suggesting though is not that banks should be free to try different ways of being run and that competition should be made easier but that banks should be run according to his design.

    Dickie is not saying the regulatory burden is too high and too costly, he is saying it is not high enough. He wants unions and depositors to get a say on boards that extends further than their position rightly allows. If depositors want a say then buy shares. If unions want a say then buy shares. Otherwise, if you don’t like the way the business is run take your money or employment elsewhere.

  4. “And yes, I think that means what you think it means. Ritchie, Prem and Colin, Howard, the gang, get to be on the board of directors of the new banks.”

    Which is, of course, what the Richie gig is all about. Has been from the start. Richie spotted a niche market. Prophet of the new economics or somesuch shit. Moved to occupy it. Free market capitalist to his toenails.

  5. Brian, follower of Deornoth

    He works on the same principle as the rest of the commentariat…anything you don’t understand must be simple.

  6. Brian & ors. You’re working on the assumption Richie wants to run a successful bank. Like politicians want a vibrant successful country? He just wants to run a bank. So he runs it into the ground? So what? That’ll be someone else’s problem. He’ll be in the Lords or a €urocommisar, by then.

  7. Richie on a bank board – thin-skinned, self-important and blind to his own gnorance. That’ll really help governance and the quality of debate.

    You forgot the other problem of Spanish and other European mutuels, cajas and landesbanken – the cronyism and interconnected corruption of union leaders, political parties, local government and company bosses.

  8. …..And heads need to roll. Whole rafts of senior bankers need to leave the industry: their mentality is corrupt and has to be swept away……

    Sounds like Stalin’s approach to the Red Army shortly before Hitler’s troops attacked.

  9. No, no, Murphy isn’t putting himself forward for the role, he says in the job description that “competence will also be important”.

  10. Umm. As I understand it, mutuals are owned by their members (depositors and borrowers). RM appears to be suggesting that banks should be broken up and mutualised. How does this square with his previous assertion that banks should be nationalised and placed under State control?

  11. Of course we would all like a sinecure or three. But only Murphy and similar lefties seem to think that it’s a moral requirement that they be provided with them.

    I think #8 has it nailed though.

  12. Frances (#12), I don’t thing he has much respect for ownership.

    Nationalisation or mutualisation would be fine for him, so long as he and his union paymasters are on the board.

  13. so long as he and his union paymasters are on the board.

    No, “are the board”. With some slimy fellow traveller in chalk-stripes as Chairweasel to take the blame when it all goes, inevitably, horribly wrong.

  14. Not entirely sure why have union on a board. Union should work for its members. The board should be working for the organisation – not the same thing at all. What is best for the union members and what is best for depositors/borrowers can be two very different things.

  15. Didn’t the Co-Op run into problems with the FSA over its board members being compentent enough to run a large finanical organisation.
    (the members include a Methodist minister, a part time civil-servant and a youth and community worker).
    Not sure they would pass the approved persons regime, mind you I’m not sure Richie would either.

  16. Also with mutuals running into trouble, here is the list of Building Society’s that had to be rescued after 2008 (there may be more):
    – Barnsley Building Society
    – Dunfermline Building Society
    – Derbyshire Building Society
    – Cheshire Building Society
    – Catholic Building Society
    – Scarborough Building Society

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *