Would they have been on 12% with Vince?
September 18th, 2008
Why oh why is this man not the Lib Dem leader?
The screen shot is of Vince Cable smiling during yesterday’s leader’s speech by Nick Clegg at the end of the Lib Dem conference in Bournemouth. He got a great ovation from the audience when Clegg singled him out for special praise. But shouldn’t it have been the party’s shadow chancellor who was on the stage not the young ex-MEP who screwed up his whole conference by suggesting that the state pension is £30 a week?
Clegg’s speech was reasonably OK but why try to ape Cameron by appearing to do it without notes when you have massive autocue monitors round the hall? It just appeared staged and contrived. Cameron really does remember every word.
So yet again a question mark hangs over the Lib Dem leadership. Clegg has improved but in that vital first few months at the start of the year he failed to make the impact that he should. He just didn’t convince. When his first big political test came on the Lisbon treaty vote he came up with a convoluted solution which even several of his MPs were not prepared to go along with.
Clegg’s position is made much worse by presence of Vince Cable - one of the few politicians of any party who is able to combine gravitas, humour and the ability to make a compelling case time and time again.
I’m told that last October after Ming resigned that Cable was advised not to put his hat into the ring because the party could not cope with replacing one man in his mid-60s with another who was not that much younger.
At the time the party hierarchy had got it into its head that if the Tories were doing well with an Oxbridge-educated former public school boy in his early 40s then they should do the same. How wrong they were.
A Lib Dem leader has to be able to command attention in a media world that finds a third party hard to deal with. It requires someone with special qualities and appeal. Cable has those - sadly Clegg hasn’t.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
After the first few PMQ’s he looked out of his depth. He stuttered, rambled and asked really poor questions. When not on economic matters he also looks off, like he’s no longer on sure ground. He would be better than Clegg, but who wouldn’t?
The Lib Dems are in a classic squeeze. They just don’t have any issues with traction with the public at the moment, as they did with the Iraq war. And the Conservatives in England and the nationalists in Scotland and Wales are now the natural home for those annoyed by the current shower.
What exactly is their point, no matter who is leader?
Does Vince have any other story than “told yer so!”? How would he make an irrelevent party relevent? It’s not the party leader; it’s the party’s position.
Now, if he had taken a pro-active role in joining with the Tories to squash the Lisbon Treaty…
I agree with almost every word of this. The bit I disagree with is the suggestion that Nick Clegg has improved. The speech yesterday was profoundly mediocre, full of David Brent inspired cliches - “people-shaped”, pah - and the state pension gaffe is just jaw-droppingly poor.
Vince Cable has a strong political presence and would have had a clear strategy for the Lib Dems (I suspect I would not have agreed with it, but at least he would have had one). Right now, the Lib Dems deserve to be on 12%. They can’t replace Nick Clegg this side of an election, but I’ve seen nothing in him so far to suggest that they should stick with him for the long haul.
I feel sorry for the British public, who look as though they’re could end up after the next election with a democratic one party state. We deserve better than that.
repost from end of last thread
Yes, the pendulum just swung decisively to Obama, but no it’s nothing to do with the excellent choice of Palin!
This is one of those spectactular game-changing “events” that are unforeseeable, and yes, will likely hand the election to Obama for the reasons GIN states at 1. It has nothing to do with the Palin pick, though - right after Mike put up his “has he blown it with the Palin pick” the polls ran away for McCain. There is simply no question that she is an asset and changed the polling tremendously for McCain at both national and state levels.
Nate, the Dem analyst who runs fivethirtyeight.com wrote recently that “even a Palinophobe like me” had to admit that the polling stated she was a very savvy pick politically.
Prior to yesterday’s Gallup and CNN state polls, the day had been good for McCain. He gained a point in the Hotline tracker and was steady in Ras and Kos meaning the prior day’s polling had been better than the night before. The ARG state polls were terrific for him. However Gallup is the gold standard (Ras is silver) and no McCainiac can dismiss the big jump to Obama.
If the banking system collapses, the party in power will lose around the world. I think that’s a given. Not even Palin magic can change that. However, looking for consolation as a Republican now facing defeat, I will say that this may be the Democrats “1992″ victory; the winner will get tagged with the blame for years of financial misery which may set up a Palin victory in 2012 and for years to come.
Meanwhile, as the great Jack W would say, I am relieved that UK politics is suddenly getting interesting again so I need not focus on the US out of default. And anyway, I’m a little more focussed on the possible collapse of our banking system - protecting our family savings, splitting it between banks etc. All quite scary stuff and does tend to take the mind off foreign elections altogether, which is just as well if you support the GOP right now.
1, Ed Davey.
In response to the thread, no they wouldn’t. Cable didn’t go for leadership presumably because of his age, or, more accurately, because he thought Ming left because of his. The truth is Ming was in his 60s but acted 20 years older. Cable doesn’t exactly come across as a part-time marathon runner but he seems perfectly fit and able, and age is an irrelevence unless it impacts political ability.
The Lib Dems went for Clegg for an array of exciting reasons:
1) the postal strike meant delays that prevented Huhne winning
2) the vacuous “He’s got good PR skills” were repeated so often people started to believe it
3) as stated above, they didn’t think “We someone with talent” but went for someone similar (they thought) to Cameron. Cameron isn’t a good leader because of his school or age, but because of his personal qualities. It’s like having women-only shortlists and then discovering all your women MPs are rubbish. You’ve got to select on merit, otherwise you rely on blind luck.
Being charitable to the Lib Dems, I think they set out a very good platform at their Conference. A platform as a centre-left alternative to the Conservatives and Labour. The only problem is that they need to wean themselves off of the concept of fighting two fights at the same time. If they set out to smash Labour then I suspect that the platform that they have would give them the opportunity to do it. They could then be a party like the Democrats in the US. The problem is I suspect that they will miss the bus.
The Lib Dems are being hit by the same thing as Labour - for something like 30 years, Death-To-The-Tories was the accepted, fashionable, non-conservative position. Now that doesn’t resonate with much of the country any more.
How many times have we heard the pleading cry that they can’t have changed, that they are still the Tories and we *must* still hate them? Blair binned socialism in the Labour Party - tried to make it a social democratic party in the European sense. When he did that, the Tories lost the Crazy-Commie attack - which meant they were no longer un-electable.
British politics was based for decades on the idea that the Tories were first unpopular outside their core and then unelectable. Careers were built on this. Then Cameron swept it all away in a matter of months.
The Labour party is the Not-The-Tories-Party - it is their only remaining core belief. The Lib Dems are largely the Not-The-Tories-Not-Labour party (in that order). That is no longer relevant - what are they *for*?
Every time I think of last year’s Lib Dem leadership election I weep softly for what might have been.
The only reason why Nick Clegg won was because the media told us that he was “the favourite”. I’m sick of the media deciding leadership elections. Of course, more fool the ordinary members for falling for the spin, but it’s pretty poor for a party of supposedly contrary members who don’t like being told what to do.
It seems they do now under Clegg, anyway.
And now on-topic for this thread….
I do feel sorry for LibDem activists and voters who deserve better than this. Mike has been warning of Clegg forever and he was just spectactularly proven right. Thirty quid a week? Our local councillors are warming up to deliver a leaflet on this to some LibDem wards. Pensioners are furious. Somebody said on PB that that was a career-ending error and I think that is correct. The man is not a PPC, he is the party leader.
And you don’t even mention the illegal robocalls Mike!
Tory candidates in LibDem held seats must be fancying their chances today. Jason Sugerman in Lewes might well win!
I am intrigued that you call for Cable though. Have you transferred your attentions from Huhne? IMO, Cable is now tainted by his call for NR nationalisation and the disaster that has been, we can see what moral hazard is doing to the markets right now.
There are millions of working class people who have effectively been dienfranchised by Labour’s shift to the centre-right. The 10p debacle removed any doubt as to Labour’s commitment to It’s core voters. so Clegg moves his Party to the already overcrowded center right. If the Lib Dem leadership had any connection with the real world, they could have come up with a manifesto which appealed to those deserted by Labour. Vince Cable would have been the ideal man to front the LibDems at this time, making them the natural party of opposition, which would be a giant step forward from being the natural party of inconsequence.
So in the first 11 posts we have James Burdett telling us that the Lib Dems’ platform at conference was a centre-left alternative to the Conservatives and Labour and grumpy old man telling us that Nick Clegg has moved his Party to the already overcrowded centre right.
I couldn’t ask for a better illustration of my view, as posted on the last thread, Nick Clegg is addicted to tactics but has no clear strategy.
Is he equidistant between Labour and Conservative? Is he seeking to take the Lib Dems to the left to replace Labour or to the right to benefit from the rise in Conservative popularity? After 9 months of his leadership, I haven’t a clue what direction the Lib Dems are heading in - in fact, they seem becalmed. In seeking to appeal to both sides simultaneously, I expect that he will appeal to neither.
As I said a couple of days ago, I think there is a danger of Cable becoming overated. He produced 1 good joke at PMQ’s but I’ve not heard anything funny since (not delibately anyway). Having seen his speech it was full of jokes that didn’t really work and I wonder if as leader, he would have the same trouble as Ming when away from the comfort zone of his brief. As for being this great forceaster, well it was obvious to anyone with a modicum of economics knowledge that 20% house inflation and massive debt to incomes ratios, that something was going to go wrong.
Would the Lib Dems being doing better with him as leaders?, possibly. Trouble is they’re so closely wedded to Labour and the idea of higher taxes that it takes a long time to change the publics view, especially when no one is listening.
10 What are you talking about - you think this week demonstrates that letting banks fail is a better option?
O/T combined central bank action across the globe to flood mkt with short term $ liquidity. expect a bounce in markets if this works.
10, the problem for the government is that it dithered (shockingly) for so long that Cable can say “If only they’d done it quickly…” and we can’t tell what the financial fallout would’ve been.
Maybe Goldsworthy should be leader? She certainly has a strong pb following.
It depends which banks and when. Suggest reading Anatole Kaletsky’s article in the Times today pointing out that the encouragement to short sellers offered by the moral hazard means that our entire UK banking system may now collapse.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/anatole_kaletsky/article4776149.ece
“By rewarding short-sellers while wiping out investors who reckoned on a long-term recovery that would restore the mortgage giants to profitability, Mr Paulson sent the clearest possible message to financial markets around the world. Any investor who puts money into a US financial institution that might run short of capital would have it expropriated by the US Government. On the other hand, sellers of US bank and insurance shares would be richly rewarded if they could destabilise any financial institution sufficiently to force it to turn to the Government for help.”
“If the Lloyds-HBOS merger offers the enlarged bank some kind of firm government safety net - not just for depositors, but crucially also for shareholders - it will probably succeed and act as a firebreak against the financial crisis on this side of the Atlantic. If, however, the merger is presented as a “pure private sector solution”, with no government support for shareholders, market attacks against HBOS will soon be revived and redirected against the merged bank.
This will leave only one solution - nationalisation of the entire British banking system. The impossible will suddenly become inevitable.”
Under Vince Cable’s plan, NR shareholders were NOT protected.
Clegg just looks like he’s doing a poor imitation of David Cameron. it looks fake and insincere.
Not sure how Cable would do on the economy. he’s just the “i told you so” man - no solutions offered.
Will be interesting to see how next few days in the banking crisis works out and what the government response is. I predict a run on Bradford and Bingley as they are hugely exposed on BTL mortgage debt. Will govt nationalise it, or HSBC take it over?
whatever happens,we can say with certaintly there will be hundreds of thousands of job losses in the next months and years. A challenge for any government.
15 - Kas - yes, it will work this time. Just like it did last time! And the time before that!
One good joke and does not a leader make.
20 I agree with you. Half the problem is that govts wont let these banks go bust and insist on using the ‘Greenspan Put’ time and time again.
Sadly a missed opportunity. Vince would have realised from the start that the Libdems should target Labour seats and provided a coherent policy platform to allow this.
20 - I doubt it, I think the market is too spooked. Looking flat from what I’m seeing, and that probably indicates a breather before resumed selling.
6/16 The LibDems went narrowly for Clegg ( as I did personally ) because a majority of us thought he was the slightly better of the 2 good candidates . For myself I took into account the performance of both candidates at the hustings here in Worthing . I disagree with Mike as to the potential for prospects with Vince as leader but I do regret as I said at the time that Julia Goldsworthy was not a candidate .
Apart from the pension fauxpas , I think Clegg has had a good conference and his speech yesterday was well received at least by LibDems .
Also, Cable f*cked up by being pro-nationalisation of Northern Rock.
24 - And the FTSE is now in negative territory.
Cable? not yet! I’ve got him pencilled in as leader of a National Unity government, when everything turns to s**t six months after Cameron and chums take over.
19
Clegg just looks like he’s doing a poor imitation of David Cameron. it looks fake and insincere.
Well as the origional is fake and insincere, obviously any imitation would be.
13
‘As for being this great forceaster, well it was obvious to anyone with a modicum of economics knowledge that 20% house inflation and massive debt to incomes ratios, that something was going to go wrong.’
Indeed it is obvious but very few politicians know it / have the guts to say it. Everybody (even Cameron) talks about sustaining (printing and pouring money down the drain) these bubbles.
Almost certainly yes. The only certainty at the moment is that Labour are unpopular. If approached by a pollster and you wish to register your discontent you tell them you’d vote Tory (or SNP in Scotland). A good part of the Lib Dem vote is a tactical one and that doesn’t apply at the moment.
If the question is would VC be better long term….. then after yesterday’s lack lustre performance probably yes
At least with Vince Cable the Lib Dems had credibility.
Clegg just comes across as a complete sham,the pretence yesterday of his speech without notes,the concern for the poor but total ignorance of state pension levels,tax switching proposals dressed up as tax cutting,the crap about feeling the economic pain with his taxpayer funded mortgage and expense accouts,not to mention the Lisbon treaty.
So changing leader is not a panacea then?
Biggest loser (by the BBC, so 15 min delay) is Lloyds TSB, down 8%.
33, oh, I just saw HBOS is the biggest winner, up 23%. So swings and roundabouts then.
Plus Barclays are doing well.
We were all but promised a year ago that the Government would increase the level of compensation for deposits in the event of a bank failure from £35k to £50k or even £100k. In the meantime, we were recommended to spread our savings around the various financial institutions.
So far this month, the Nationwide has hoovered up the Derbyshire and the Cheshire adding to the Portman sometime ago. Now LloydsTSB has acquired HBOS. Who knows what will happen to other High Street financial institutions in the coming months.
So the number of separate companies where we can invest onshore is contracting. Until yesterday we had our savings spread around in the event of a bank failure. Today they are very much more concentrated.
What has the Government done to increase protection. So far sweet FA. The whole scheme will now have to be reviewed - more delays - whilst consumer protection decays. I am surprised anyone can still support this excuse for a Government.
28 - “everything turns to s**t six months after Cameron and chums take over”
Much unlike now…
@32:
No, just a soothing balm.
Test at 2. Yesterday I was walking past a newsagent and saw a US magazine (the name escapes me) which said on it’s cover ’seven reasons why Palin is a disaster’ and then listed several things-troopergate, lying, bad TV performance, economically illiterate etc- that I wasn’t aware of. From that cover it seems she is infact becoming a major liability.
@36:
In any case, Coldstone’s terrified precisely because he fears that exactly the opposite will happen: that Cameron will take over just as things start to recover, affording Dave two, perhaps three, terms of uninterrupted growth.
35
Just think! when the Tories come to power there’ll only be one Bank and one insurance company left, so much easier to nationalize then.
Privatize the profits, nationalize the losses, (socialism for the rich) after all if its good enough for the USSA, the United Socialist States of America its good enough for us.
Miised the Clegg faux pas on pensions.but he seems to have a problem with the number 30…..
rogerh
39. It’s the same line over and over again ‘well, after Cameron’s government is a massive failure a few months into his first term’ etc etc. It’s like they have nothing else to cling on to apart from the hope that Cameron will be a failure.
38 Roger and you see that every day on UK websites, but actually, the US polling says no.
in swing states and at national level and including post her Gibson interview she was boosting the ticket - again, read recent, as in a day or so ago, posts by the Democratic number-crunchers on 538.com if you doubt that.
The McCain-Palin bounce has been derailed by the financial crisis. Simple as that really. And nobody can withstand that. It’s just the event.
42, a la Boris.
@40:
George Osborne will unveil “Osbornomics”, an entirely new economic system based on New Math, and unveil an emergency currency based by The Queen’s eggs.
12 - I agree with that. I saw Clegg’s speech in full last night and it was ok. It had its good moments and its good lines, but the speech as a whole was directionless and without any clear message - other than the fatuous statement that the Lib Dems are the only party of social justice (which all three parties have claimed) and the only party to commit to specific tax cuts to help the poor (when all three parties have claimed to be able to help the poor). Overall, the speech suffered from being a poor imitation of Cameron’s from last year.
As for the Lib Dems in general, Clegg’s speech summed up their problem. He was attacking Labour and the Conservatives at the same time, while trying to sound appealing to both camps - tax cuts and small state, small-c liberal conservatism to try and halt the Conservative tide, whilst going all lefty with talk about how evil bankers are and how there would be no nuclear power under a Lib Dem government.
Strange tactics. What is the strategy exactly?
Morgan Stanley running into the arms of Wachovia doesnt exactly inspire - they’re in a poor financial position too. oops.
I do like it when you write about the Lib Dems Mike - there’s some real anger there!
I agree with almost everything you say but I think in retrospect the big mistake occurred not at the last leadership contest but at the one before that. Looking back at how Cable’s political profile and public appeal have grown over the course of this Parliament, it is now crystal clear they should have gone for him when Kennedy quit. Instead they went for Ming, and the subsequent issues around Ming’s age made it moreorless inevitable in my view that when he went they would go for Clegg.
The psychology of all this is interesting in my view, and also has echoes of what happened when the Labour Party changed its leaders. Just as there was a feeling that it was Gordon’s “turn” when Blair went, in large part because he had stood aside in 1994, so there was a feeling that it was Ming’s “turn” in 2006 because he had stood aside in 1999. As it turned out, both parties learned the hard way that sentiment is not a particularly good reason to make someone a party leader.
31. ‘not to mention the Lisbon Treaty’ Well why should he? Whatever he is he doesn’t strike me as an obsessive! Seems to think that the current difficulties are the fault of greedy bankers and speculators; no doubt you will tell us it’s all the fault of Giscard & Delors?
Away from banking, there are rumours that one of the big commercial property consultancies is about to go to the wall. Being a commercial surveyor this is ominous news.
48 - and Labour were hoping against hope that Brown would be popular because he was boring and dependable (i.e. not like Blair). Didn’t work for them either.
50 Chris M which one?
44 - building a political strategy on the hope that your opponents will screw up is lousy politics. However, the Conservatives are in such a commanding position that may be Labour’s best option.
39
Dream on! We’re in for a long period of both economic and political turbulence. There have been two consecutive long term governments, I think its unlikely there will be a third.
The Cameron government will be beset by not just economic problems, but a major political upheaval caused by the desire of Scotland to leave the UK. A Tory government in London will soon move the majority of Scots in that direction.
On the economic front, open warfare will soon break out between the ‘Wets and ‘Drys.’
54 - Mystic Coldstone I see!
@48/51:
You know that Spin Doctors have started to believe their own bullshit when they find themselves seriously claiming that “unpopularity” is a saleable character trait.
Not Flash, Just Shit.
51, if he were boring and dependable it would’ve worked (as it did for 3 months).
The start of Gord’s fightback but,as ever,too little too late.
Windfall tax and fuel poverty set to be debated at Labour conference
Reliable sources have informed us that over 45 Labour affiliates including CLPs and unions have prioritised a debate on a windfall tax at next week’s Labour conference - with more submissions than any other issue. The debate on ‘Record energy prices, windfall profits, fuel poverty & government intervention’ is now set to be one of the main political flashpoints at conference. This debate is crucially about real people’s lives in the real world - thanks to everyone who helped make this happen! If your CLP made a submission please inform us immediately and let us know the contact details of your delegate.
The cult of Vince Cable gathers strength, however, Cables strengths are significantly over-rated IMO. Jeremy Paxman always treats him like some sort of venerable guru on Newsnight but that’s because Paxman doesn’t know his @rse from his elbow when it comes to economic matters.
Cable clearly understands the damaging extent of the problems facing the world economy and the particularly devastating plight of the debtor nations like the US and UK. To his credit he is one of the few mainstream politicians prepared to publicly tell it like it is particularly in the case of the bursting UK house price bubble.
Where Cable goes way off track IMO is in his proposed solutions to these problems. His taxpayer funded bailouts differ in little respect to Browns madcap, and highly expensive, schemes to keep himself in office for a few more months. Privatised profits and socialised losses lead to the eventual destruction of living standards for the majority and is the road to bankruptcy and stagnation.
Listening to Darling this morning on Radio 4 I think there is another financial institution set to go to the wall today. Not too sure which, there is not an obvious bank such as HBoS left. However, the problem is (again) that Darling hints at a problem without putting forward any convincing arguments that solutions are in hand. I don’t see the point of this approach, either say nothing or explain fully the problem and solutions planned. He did say that they had known of problems at HBoS for several weeks; if this was the case, why were no announcements made to the stock exchange? Either Darling didn’t know or the stock exchange rules have been broken.
@54:
And lo, did Coldstone join Rogerdamus in the hallowed halls of those confusing prophecy with desperate wank fantasy.
52. Not sure but there is a rumour that *somebody* is in trouble. It will inevitably be one with too much weight in transactional work. Colliers CRE is one that sticks in my mind but I haven’t heard any names.
Either way, we are expecting a raft of redundancies through the profession over the next week or so. Many firms are already in consultation.
Not sure what purpose this thread serves, speculating on what ‘might have been’ strikes me as self indulgent naval gazing. Let’s face it, Cable didn’t stand for the leadership, says it all really and Chris Huhne lost out again for what ever reason? The Lib Dems went for an imitation Cameron as the safe option; he’s posh, articulate and photogenic but is as dynamic as a Sinclair C5.
The problem is the Lib Dems hitched their ride to Labour’s coat tail for ten years, now that Labour is heading for the precipice, Clegg is dithering whether to let go or not.
The latest polls would suggest that the decision to elect Clegg and continuing a policy of Tory decapitation may not have been the best option in the present Tory re-assurgency. So what’s Clegg the ‘leader’ going to do about it to improve on this derisory 12% poll, because he’s running out of time, fast?
No. They may have reached 10%, but not 12.
Good Morning PBers the world over !!
…. Two polls to muse over the mueseli :
New Selzer/Indy Star poll for Indiana :
McCain 44% .. Obama 47%
………………….
New SUSA poll for New Mexico :
McCain 44% .. Obama 52%
………………….
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080917/NEWS0502/80917076/-1/ARCHIVE
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=edc4d070-fb0f-43a8-b19c-6b32c3ad36f7
47 - a Wachovia Morgan Stanley merger would be absolute madness. The weak merging with the very weak. I’m surprised that Wachovia haven’t collapsed already, they’re filled up to the gills with toxic waste. This merger if it occurs would be the quickest merged company to file for bankruptcy - absolute madness.
In this extract from Bloomberg one could easily substitute our Gordon Brown “the invisible man” for George Bush.
Sept. 18 (Bloomberg) — This week, President George W. Bush held a state dinner for Ghana’s president, surveyed Texas hurricane damage, posed with Youth of the Year award finalists, and met with Army General David Petraeus.
During that time, Bush has publicly uttered 160 words about the worst Wall Street crisis since the Great Depression, saying the government is working to “reduce disruptions” in U.S. financial markets.
42
I’m not clinging on to any hope, I’ve been around for long enough to know, that everything turns to s**t eventually.
One has only to look at the political situation of the 19th century and compare that to the politics of the 20th, (the Parties the franchise etc) consider the dramatic differences that took place. Then if the politics of the 19th and 20th were so different, the politics of the 21st century will see even more dramatic changes.
p.s.
I did suggest that you should enquire about adult education classes, skills etc, to improve your employability as being in the Civil Service under the next Tory government won’t be too secure. I do hope you’ve taken my advice?
It such a shame for the LDs, but I think you’re spot on Mike. Cable would have got people to take the LDs seriously. The only person who takes Nick Clegg seriously is Nick Clegg (and boy does he take himself seriously).
BTW Interesting to see that Milburn has reared his ugly head. I pointed out a while back that he was a bit too quiet.
18 HBOS came under sustained attack from short sellers because their highly flawed business model had finally caught up with them just like it did earlier with Northern Rock ie HBOS had a pile of loans coming up which they had to roll over but they couldn’t borrow in the interbank market unless they paid a prohibitively high 3% above bank rate. It was effectively, their fellow banks who finished off HBOS not a bunch of demonised speculators.
62 interesting. Colliers share price has indeed tanked massively recently. they have already recently lost their CFO. we shall see.
UNIVERSAL TRANSLATOR ALERT
UNIVERSAL TRANSLATOR ALERT
Did anyone hear Prezza on R4 this morning. I have never heard so much garbage in all my life.
40 coldstone
‘Privatise the profits,nationalize the losses (socialism for the rich)’
But that’s exactly what your leader Gordon Brown has been championing for the past 11 years and yet we don’t hear any criticism from you?
PPI,Metronet to give a specific example ring any bells?????
Vince Cable always strikes me as being very smug. Sure he was right about the financial situation but then so were a lot of us.
@68:
Yes, the big change in 21st Century politics will be the extinction of the Labour movement as a political force, and the final eradication of left wing ideas.
In truth, the ideas died in the late 20th Century, and the world is just waiting for the remaining socialists themselves to die.
35: If the banking system properly fails, the deposit protection scheme will be near worthless. There is £3.5bn in it, or about £60 each.
If only Lloyds goes down, we might get a little bit more. They “only” have 20 million-odd customers
It’s pretty terrifying.
The good news for Conservatives about Clegg is that he is unable to re-focus the party on Labour seats. The LDs as a consequence face a two party squeeze because their message of “vote for us to get rid of Labour” is diluted when they waste limited media space on attacking the Conservatives. Their guns are not pointed in a single direction.
30 seats after the GE now looks a more likely outcome for the LDs. Clegg is throwing away that “once in 20 years opportunity” to replace Labour as the party of the left. Labour have not been as weak as this in 20 years yet the LDs are only polling 12%! It is so bad he should resign. The LDs are facing losses in MEPs and County councillors next year, just like London 2008.
63 - “The problem is the Lib Dems hitched their ride to Labour’s coat tail for ten years …”
That could never have a pleasant outcome!
Sorry, but I just don’t see it myself. The guy is good, but he is not John McCain, crusty old war horse.
Clegg has is problems, but he is eye-catching in a Cameroon kinda way..
Remember these are the Lib Dems - they are susceptible to a Third-Party-Squeeze whoever is in charge.
Maybe if they had the guts to make a woman leader, they would get noticed. Certainly no one can ignore Lynne Featherstone, but I’m not entirely sure that is a sure-fire vote winner..
Er yeah right. And we’re experience the free markets finest hour right now. The banks took all our money, shoved it on a horse to may a quick buck and lost. I suppose Cameron’s embracing of the NHS, minimum wage etc etc is a classic right wing ploy too. Good work Martin! To have a right you need a left and vice versa.
75
Really! which is why nationalization is back in such a big way.
I would have thought it is the ‘free market’ that is in the dock.
Anway you’ll need us ‘ol Lefties around to defend you from the likes of Prez Palin when she blames all this on the ‘Gays’ right wing religious loonies always do y’know.
p.s.
It isn’t your fault is it?
71. It is interesting, there have been several takeover rumours as well (notably Atisreal acquiring DTZ) and the reality is that there are very fews firms which are not on extremely shaky ground. Only those with a stronger base in consultancy work look secure right now.
Even if nobody folds the job losses coming are going to be bloody. I’m fortunate that I have no responsibilities and could take a sustained period of unemployment but for many others the idea of a couple of years out of work in an industry that has shut down recruitment must be terrifying.
76
I’m pretty bearish on the medium-term prospects for the UK economy, propped up for so long as it has been on rising house prices which are now heading south, however, all this talk of the ‘whole banking system failing’ is hysterical nonsense IMO. The like of HSBC, Barclays, and Lloyds are not going to fail and will come out of the next few years downturn stronger and, in Barclays case particularly, with a bigger global presence after cherry picking from Lehmans.
Badly run banks like HBOS will be swallowed up by the others or propped up and gradually unwound by the government. I suspect a lot of the scare mongering about the so-called threat of systemic bank failure is to panic that terrified clown Brown into coming up with more of the tax-payer funded readies.
Morning all, if Cable had any sense he would have private talks with David Cameron and then at the start of the Tory conference announce his defection to the Tory Party. Cameron could promise him some important role in the Lords. Result bye bye 50 LibDem MPs.
Incidentally in the absense of Stuart Dickson, the Scottish TV this morning has been wall to wall coverage of the demise of the Bank of Scotland. for once I think Brown actually has done the only thing possible by agreeing to the merger but alex Salmond’s claim that the oldest bank has been pulled down by spivs and speculators will resonate with the Scots voters. BBC Scotland reporting every half hour that Salmond has cancelled his trip to the Ryder Cup in order to get close to the decision makers in Lloyds TSB to try and save thousands of Scottish jobs. Even if he fails, he will be seen to have fought for Scottish jobs.
Does anyone outside the LibDem party believe they ahve anything to offer the country? I thought Nick Clegg spoke reasonably well yesterday, what little of his speech I watched but he is a pale shadow of Cameron. He gives the impression of being “forced” and that humour and a commanding presence does not come naturally. Very surprising for an old boy of Westminster or whichever public school he attended.
80 - What we are seeing is the down side of regulation, in that it is human nature to try to subvert barriers and cross lines in the sand. The further danger is that if we try to close down the current subversions then new ones will only be found.
71 i know peopole at the big agencies - none have announced big job losses yet but it can only be a matter of time as the transactional work volumes heve been down 50%+ for over a year.
The article about the Lib Dems is totally biased. Nick Clegg gave an excellent speech and is a really good presenter. Vince Cable is of course a great figure but he isn’t leader and the majority of Lib Dems are happy with a younger leader like Clegg who will be there for the duration. The Tory line is that Clegg is rubbish because that suits them….!
85 Regulations and laws are a good thing. It’s important to define boundaries and make certain practices illegal. This should evolve over time and because people break or get round them is no argument to get rid of them. No-one would argue that because people still commit murder we should get rid of homocide laws.
83 “all this talk of the ‘whole banking system failing’ is hysterical nonsense”
i would have said so too, a week ago. Now i couldnt say that with any confidence at all. I think there’s at least a 30% chance of this happening, sad to say.
Mike,
Yes, I’m afraid so. It’s called squeeze. What difference would Cable have made? He would have tightened the Lib Dem media presence from 2 people, to one person.
Kaletsky article is BS. why should “investors who reckoned on a long-term recovery that would restore the mortgage giants to profitability” (in other words, economically illiterate imbeciles) profit from their “investments”?
the short sellers got it spot on, they noticed that the emperor’s outfit was looking a bit threadbare and got on.
88, on the plus side, those that own cave networks can look forward to an influx of new tenants providing an important new stream of revenue.
@81:
But, Coldstone, that’s not because anybody’s started believing in Socialism again. It’s just a utilitarian measure because the US government allowed Fannie and Freddie to become too big.
In any case, it’s now clear that the nationalisation of Northern Rock was a bloody stupid idea. Funny how risking the entire UK economy to shore up a few Labour marginals hasn’t turned out so good.
84
Brown allowed it? I think sponsored it might be a better term.
Lloyds TSB and HBOS are to merge, the Chancellor said, “I wanted to make sure that we facilitated the coming together of two banks to create a secure institution.”
“I think it was absolutely necessary - we are going through a truly exceptional time - for some time we have been aware that there has been some problems with HBOS.
“With HBOS and Lloyds coming together it creates a secure financial institution - financial stability must trump competition - we will make sure this deal goes through,” he said.
He said there had been no bribery and that this decision would not be revisited, “the competition requirement will be wavered in this circumstance - financial stability is more important.
“We do need to take this opportunity to take a look at how our regulatory system works - it is an area where we need to do more work,” the Chancellor said.
“We are determined that we will do everything we possibly can to stabilise this situation - financial stability is of utmost importance.”
If I thought Scottish Independence was a strong possibility before this, I now think it’s a certainty.
87 - No but in terms of activity that we merely wish to monitor and curb the excesses of then we should be more wary of a rush to regulate. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with short selling, the reason it has appeared to cause issues is because the only realistic money making chances are on the short side of the market and also that the shorters were pushing against an open door. If confidence had held up in HBOS so would the share price regardless of the level of shorting as there would have been enough balancing traders on the long side.
Mike, your post is steeped in the benefit of hindsight and heavily tinged with a dose of ‘told-you-so’ (from someone who voted Huhne and never liked Clegg from the beginning).
Being Lib Dem leader is a poisoned chalice - whoever takes the role will be probed for weaknesses by the media and cruelly lampooned. Cable knew what he would have faced and wisely chose not to endure it. Clegg has withstood the media scrutiny quite well and has not even caved despite his occasional tendency to self-destruct by inappropriate citing of the number ‘30′.
Because Clegg is fallible, he has to bring forward people like Cable and Huhne to show the party is more than a one-man band so perhaps the net effect is helpful. Certainly the LDs have a stronger front bench team than Cameron’s lot.
As for positioning, I for one wish we would accentuate our civil liberties stance against the snooping state and whitehall-knows-best centralization a bit more. For that reason I certainly don’t like the robocall move. But overall I like the redistributive tax cuts (even though they may prove difficult to deliver if Labour and the financial community continue their joint campaign to flush the economy down the pan).
The 12% poll rating may be a rogue poll or perhaps a signal that the economic dislocation is pushing people to embrace familiar certainties. We’ll see. But change leader? Not a chance. There’s no time for looking back. LDs have to get on with the job with the team we’ve got.
@88:
The thing you’re not realising is that this is not capitalism failing, this is capitalism succeeding.
The weak are being swept away. This is what is periodically is supposed to happen. This is why dimwitted nationalisations are best avoided- because they reduce the cleansing effect of sudden market renormalisation.
2.The referendum on the Lisbon Treaty vote was a complete disaster, his handling of that not only reflected badly on him and the Libdems. It sent out the message that Clegg was like Gordon Brown when it came to avoiding a situation where the outcome was not already heavily stacked in their favour.
Clegg ran a very poor leadership campaign right from the start, but like Gordon Brown he was helped by the fact that he was the preordained favourite despite his campaign skills did not living up to his pre contest billing within the party or in the press.
The Conservative party finally got its act together last time, and both the Parliamentary party and the grass roots ended up choosing the best candidate to emerge in the contest to lead them and run a GE campaign.
I know that the happy couple in Downing St have said that they will legislate to ensure that the merger of HBOS and Lloyds TSB goes through without any problems from the point of view of the competition regulators.
But (and it is quite a big but) we cannot legislate here to over-ride EU competition regulation. The new bank/insitution will have an impact on the continent - that is inevitable. I wonder what the Eurocrats are planning to ensure that they retain supremacy
91
I think we are headed for stagflation, if the banks wont lend money, mortgages will be as rare as hens teeth, property prices will drop further, more negative equity, and that’s ignoring the business side of the equation
92
If Socialism is such a bad idea, why has Cameron been so eager to adopt it?
Martin you can call it anyname you want, you can dress it up any way you need, to make you feel better. Massive intervention by the state is socialism in my book, and I’ve noticed a lot of right-wing commentators agree with me.
In fact a couple of days ago, the DT’s editorial warned nasty lefties not to be so smug, a pretty pointless warning to me, as smug is my normal mode anyway, that’s when I’m not being a ‘Prig’ of course.
What is it George V said, ‘We’re all socialists now’
95 - “Certainly the LDs have a stronger front bench team than Cameron’s lot”
LOL
More delusion from the left. So who is Cameron’s equal in the Lib Dems?
Keep it up
88
With respect I think that “30% chance of system bank failure” even here in the profligate UK is hysterical. For sure the situation is dire, the worst for many years, though I was dismissed by many on here a week or two ago when I agreed with Darlings assessment that we have the worst conditions for 60 years.
There will be a severe recession in the UK particularly in the financial, construction, and retail sectors. Nominal house prices will fall at least 50% over the next two years and will take many more years before they show significant signs of rising gain. Job losses, bankruptcies, repossessions will rocket while living standards for many will plunge. But all this is a natural market reaction to the profligacy and reckless borrowing/spending of recent years. Life will still go on. Well capitalised, well run companies, including many banks will carry on trading and come out the other ned stronger. Weak, badly run companies, and governments, will go to the wall or be taken over.
I remember the stagflation of the seventies, the recession of the early nineties etc and the current situation is worse but the banking system will survive and eventually prosper again.
98, I think the EU will let it past. They’d be insane to stop it. If the UK banking sector gets into serious trouble, that’s got to affect Europe, not to mention that we’re already EU-sceptic. If they blocked this and it all goes pear-shaped we’ll be EU-hating.
Guido on Vince Cable
http://www.order-order.com/2008/09/cable-shows-his-ignorance-again.html
A spokesman for EU Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes, asked on
Thursday whether the EU regulator would have to approve the deal, said: “It is
up to the parties to verify whether they need to notify to us or to the
authorities in the UK.”
The Commission has sole power to decide on mergers of a “European dimension”. However, if both companies have two-thirds of their turnover in a single member state, the competition authorities in that country are empowered
to authorise or block the deal.
101
The left? the Left? The LD’s have moved to the Right! Its David (Our NHS) Cameron whose on the left. The only politician in the UK whose further to the left than Cameron, is Boris!
96 No, No, No.
What is week about having £100k saved in a Northern Rock bank account. If the govt hadn’t helped they would have lost the lot. They would have done nothing wrong, nor been weak in any way.
This crisis is NOT capitalism working.
It is capitalism NOT working because capitalism lost track of the relationship between value, risk and money, because its language was far to complicated/abstract and people wanted to earn money without doing anything.
week=weak etc
83. Voxpop
Banking crises have a life all their own. Banks dont even need to be badly run to suffer catastrophic liquidity failures. I am amused by the idiot commentators who say stupid things like “the Fed could run out of money” (no, the US can print more dollars.), but we shouldnt be too dismissive. The authorities need to restore confidence swiftly or things could spiral out of control.
The deleveraging and the shock to the global financial markets means that the London property market now looks very vulnerable. Having started the year believing house would fall 10-12% this year and 20-23% overall was likely, I now think 15% this year and a fall of 35% is now my most probable scenario with a fall on the order of 45% now possible (note real prices, so in nominal terms that would be 30-35% over 3 years).
I am beginning to think that Labour should consider a swift election. The HBOS takeover is going to mean a lot of misery north of the border and I see a lot of jobs going, so the BCC forecast of an extra 300,000 job losses is now looking optimistic. 2009 is going to be really horrible. And I really dont think anyone is listening to the bunker’s claim that Gordon is the man for the job. Matters were not improved by the moronic John Prescott on R4 this morning, who reminded everyone of how stupid Labour sounds and is. It mattered so much less when things were rosy, but now his malapropisms just sound dumb.
Funny - I thought raising taxes on workers to support unemployed chavs was a left wing policy?
109, an election with Brown as leader, having just seen a poll with the Tories on 52% and a 28 point lead? [I do think that was a rogue, but it isn't miles out of line with recent polling].
Not a chance.
110
You name me one, ‘Right Wing’ policy economic or otherwise that DC has promised to implement on coming to power?
As a Tory, I’m disappointed with Clegg too, because we need an effective opposition party for obvious reasons. Labour is inherently morally unacceptable to me, so that leaves the LibDems as the only possibility. The LD leader should stamp his values and personality on his party sufficiently to ensure that after 2010 no Labour MPs are tempted to defect and take the LDs over as a less-contaminated brand than their own. Clegg shows no signs of doing this.
I can remember previous LD leaders back to Thorpe and they’ve all been utter buffoons. Wee Davey Steel, Paddy Pantsdown, Chat Show Charlie, Menses Campbell and now Nick “£30″ Clegg. every one has been a damn fool but at least none was transparently malicious in the way that Labour leaders always are.
107 - We are still living under the misapprehension that money in banks should be 100% safe. It shouldn’t be and isn’t. There is no such thing as a 100% safe investment. Anything that has a return has a risk. The higher the return the higher the risk. Bank accounts are low return, so low risk, not no risk.
109. After this week, a 30-35% fall in nominal house prices peak-to-trough over 3 years is looking hopelessly optimistic. They’re already down 12% and recent events must have kicked away whatever sentiment remained in the market so falls will accelerate. I think we’ll reach 30% down by next summer and then keep falling.
Economics is obviously Cable’s strength and if he was leader I can image him on TV and the radio opining sagely on the current situation. In the same way Ming was more prominent than the Tory spokesmen when Iraq was the main issue of the day.
However, these are uncertain times and voters want a united party with a team that looks like a potential government, not just a one-man band. And they don’t want the uncertainty of a hung Parliament. There is only one alternative to Labour: hence, the swing behind the Tories.
Also, I’m not sure Cable is a good strategist. He seems to be behind the move to become the party of lower taxation, a reversal of their position in recent elections. The Libdems were regarded as impotent but principled. They now seem impotent but opportunistic. At best the policy seems a cynical ploy to stave off the resurgent Tories, and at worst it looks a dangerous leap in the dark when government borrowing is zooming out of control.
Huhne could still become leader …
13.”As I said a couple of days ago, I think there is a danger of Cable becoming overated.”
I agree with that, at the end of the day Vince chose not to put himself forward as a candidate in the contest. The Libdems over looked the one candidate who did that twice, Huhne has the hunger and ambition and proved himself very media savvy street fighter in a campaign….
18: Kaletsky’s article is IMO mostly wrong. Short selling of shares in itself is a matter for the free market and I see no reason why governments (British or American) should have a view on whether a bank should be priced at X or Y. Nor is it in the national interest that taxpayers should prop up shareholders (who are also mostly taxpayers) who made a bad guess about the price. So I’m opposed to any kind of guarantee for the Lloyds-TSB share price, which Kaletsky is advocating. Similarly, I’m sorry for Northern Rock shareholders, but we shouldn’t pay them any more than the shares were worth (which appears to be nothing).
Where government intervention is justifiable is when the underlying structure of essentially healthy companies is undermined by short-term hitches in the way the system operates. The complex and non-transparent system of securitisation of debt has largely collapsed, making a number of business models non-viable until it’s sorted out. A major alternative source of funding is the deposits of companies and individuals, and governments can legitimately act to stop a panic flight of deposits. If this is done successfully - and a merger of banks if one is over-exposed to short-term interbank debt is one way to help - then people can speculate the share price up or down all they like without putting the system at risk.
even if the system doesnt fail i still believe the depths of our problems point to millions more unemployed - gives me no pleasure to say so - i may become one of them. this recession is going to be brutally severe & its just starting to hit home to many people. even without a systemic banking failure we are looking at the most severe recession since the war. It’s as plain as the nose on your face.
We’re having a major financial crisis restricting credit to all but the well above averagely wealthy, we have rocketing inflation and commmodity prices and a weakening currency. it is a perfect storm for people’s household budgets. with the financial and banking crisis even the “well off” professional can’t now assume 2 good pay packets will contine to come in each month.
Labour will be hopeless at finding solutions to all this. tax receipts will plunge & either borrowing will rise or huge cuts in services made.
93 Coldstone, I think for once you and I agree on something!! I will stand corrected but wasn’t the Bank of Scotland the country’s (i.e. Britain’s)oldest surviving bank having been created by the original Scottish Parliament in 1695.
The death of the Bank of Scotland will be as important to Scots as Manchester United being wound up to the English.
The short answer is yes because the poll is clearly a rogue.
So I hope when the next Mori poll shows the inevitable correction you’ll do a piece that says ‘the Lib Dems were right to choose Clegg’ - but however I sadly suspect you won’t…
I’m having my say on the Lib Dems… I can’t hold it in any longer and it’ll make me feel better.
How can anyone seriously still believe that they are the warm, fuzzy, ‘our fight is not with the other two parties’ community campaigners anymore when Clegg says things like this:-
” Once you strip out the offensive parts of the Conservative Party there isn’t much left ”
(nothing like annoying / insulting over 50% of voters while making yourself look offensive and nasty).
Calling ministers complacent about the growing hardship many face after stating the state pension was about ‘about £30 quid’.
Rules out coal and nuclear and wants to bring in vicious green taxes that a majority of families would probably struggle to offset against a reduction in other taxes.
Want to bring in half-cocked health boards/police to bribe/force people to prove they are healthy before a tax break.
Bring in road pricing + hikes in fuel duty and god knows what else to fleece anyone who actually has to live in the real world to support their family / have a decent life.
Promise huge / unfunded and vague tax cuts PURELY to try and save their Southern seats and Middle-England marginal’s knowing full well they can say what they like because it’ll never have to be followed through.
‘Make noises’ to back off from their rampant pro-EU stance, re the above.
Dare to call the Conservatives ‘Blue Labour’ while being exactly that themselves (being whatever they need to be or saying whatever they need to say to gain votes depending on the territory).
I could go on…
In closing, Clegg is an angry bum-fluffed knock-off copy wannabe Cameron with heaps of hypocrisy but without the credibility.
I have never ever heard something so absurd when he told the delegates that they were ‘headed for government’. Keep saying it Nick, but it’ll never sound any less ridiculous. It’s not going to happen.
I expect the Lib Dems to knife Clegg at some point in the medium term once it’s clear his tactics are not working.
12% flatters them and they would be best served being honest on what they stand for (if they actually know themselves anymore).
112 -
Schools - “reintroduce teaching that stretches the strongest”
Employment - “every out of work benefit claimant capable of doing so will be expected to work or prepare for work”
Prisons - “make community sentences tough and effective, and withdraw benefits for those who don’t attend”
Health - “Introducing payment-by-results within the system”
Don’t want to bore you. I’ve shown you mine, now show me a coherent Labour or Lib Dem policy over the last year which has been implemented and has worked.
I won’t hold my breath.
115 Matt a 30-35% fall brings you down to the long-term trend line. The market always over-reacts, down as well as up. Thus, a drop of 40-45% is nor unrealistic.
As predicted by yours truly this morning, major rally, ftse back to 5000, shorts are screaming. LLOY back to last night close.
Central banks back on the pump!!!
122
Rules out coal and nuclear and wants to bring in vicious green taxes that a majority of families would probably struggle to offset against a reduction in other taxes.
Whats the point of having Coal and Nuclear power stations, Zac Goldsmith and his ‘Green terrorists’ would only sabotage them.
When will Cameron condemn Goldsmith for his defence of attacks on private property?
Huhne has exactly the economic credibility needed for the moment, authority, and more range than Cable.
128 i guess we can all relax now then…..
if only life was so simple. .
Good to read some sensible comment about short selling for once. Listening to the media you’d think these poeple are out there bringing down otherwise happy companies at will and on a whim.
109 Ken – “the US can print more dollars”: they can only print so much without risking higher inflation
106.
“The only politician in the UK whose further to the left than Cameron, is Boris!”
Reuters reports that confidence in Political Parties throughout the UK overnight has led to their shares being suspended. Fly-by-night operators such as Tony Blair and John Major are being accused by commentators at having milked the system for decades with speculative speeches built on sub-prime electoral support, leaving the system in he present mess. MMC rules about monopoly of unprincipled drivel are being suspended to allow the merger of NewLabour and Conservative Parties despite their current joint market share. The Chairman of the merged group will be Boris Johnson and the Chief Executive John Cruddas. Massive redundancies among young suits on cocaine are expected following the merger - this has led to a series of wild parties in Palace of Westminster toilets where piles of debit cards have been abandoned because their edges are now too blunt to let them fit into cash mashines. Gordon Brown is leaving the organisation with an undisclosed sum to become the biggest merchant banker in Scotland.
126. Yes that’s what I was saying. In fact the long-term trend line has been distorted by the unprecedentedly long boom so I’d say we need a fall of more than 30-35% to hit the trend and then we’ll see an overshoot.
As has been pointed out, even if prices fall 50% they will still be more expensive than in 1997 as a multiple of average salaries.
113.
“You name me one, ‘Right Wing’ policy economic or otherwise that DC has promised to implement on coming to power?”
Other than those of Gordon Brown and Tony Blair of course.
8: um, without conceding all your points about the LDs and Labour, what do you think the Tories are *for*? Cameron will let us know in due course? Perhaps. Sadly, because of general public cynicism, all British parties have found they succeed best when they’re campaigning against someone else, and of course that feeds the cynicism - “if they all say the others are rubbish, perhaps they’re all correct”.
Interesting to see test refer to himsel