Please follow the link to see updated list of high street and companies that have gone in administration since January 2008
Obituary of the high street and other companies
Please donate 50p, thank you from Recession2009
Showing posts with label economy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label economy. Show all posts
Sunday, 19 July 2009
Obiturtary of the high street and other companies - UPDATED
Please follow the link to see updated list of high street and companies that have gone in administration since January 2008
Obituary of the high street and other companies
Obituary of the high street and other companies
Saturday, 18 July 2009
Theatre and the recession
Hi
I went to the theatre this week to the premier of ENRON, a theatrical production based on the actions and collapse of the giant sized company ENRON.
As I though some of your might find this quite interesting i have created a new page entitled ENRON. As I live in Britain the whole Enron thing back in 2001 didn't really mean much, but know we are in the economical problems that we are looking back at began is interesting.
please follow this link ENRON
I went to the theatre this week to the premier of ENRON, a theatrical production based on the actions and collapse of the giant sized company ENRON.
As I though some of your might find this quite interesting i have created a new page entitled ENRON. As I live in Britain the whole Enron thing back in 2001 didn't really mean much, but know we are in the economical problems that we are looking back at began is interesting.
please follow this link ENRON
Theatre and the recession
Hi
I went to the theatre this week to the premier of ENRON, a theatrical production based on the actions and collapse of the giant sized company ENRON.
As I though some of your might find this quite interesting i have created a new page entitled ENRON. As I live in Britain the whole Enron thing back in 2001 didn't really mean much, but know we are in the economical problems that we are looking back at began is interesting.
please follow this link ENRON
I went to the theatre this week to the premier of ENRON, a theatrical production based on the actions and collapse of the giant sized company ENRON.
As I though some of your might find this quite interesting i have created a new page entitled ENRON. As I live in Britain the whole Enron thing back in 2001 didn't really mean much, but know we are in the economical problems that we are looking back at began is interesting.
please follow this link ENRON
UK economy shrinking at fastest rate in more than 50 years
Downward revisions to official statistics show output fell 2.4% in the first three months of the year and the recession started three months earlier than thought
The recession facing Britain is even deeper than had been thought and started more than a year ago, it was revealed today.
National income fell in the first quarter of this year by 2.4%, the biggest drop since 1958, as the Office for National Statistics revised its initial estimate of 1.9%.
The figures are much worse than expected. Extended to the whole year, the drop in output in the January to March period is now equal to 4.9% – the worst since records began in 1948.
"We hope the recovery comes as soon as possible but sadly we now know this recession has been longer and deeper than we had thought," said shadow chancellor George Osborne.
"This also means that in the future unemployment will be higher and Labour's debt crisis will be even worse."
Although GDP fell 2.4% in the third quarter of 1979 and first quarter of 1974, statisticians said these were rounded from 2.36% or 2.37%. The figure for this year was exactly 2.4%.
The revision is one of the biggest ever made by the ONS and it said the reasons were changes to its estimate of the construction and services sectors.
The ONS also revised down its figure for the second quarter of last year to -0.1% from zero, meaning the recession started earlier than previously thought. And the fourth quarter of 2008 figure was revised down to a fall of 1.8%.
"The recession, which now begins in the second quarter of 2008 rather than the third, is now thought to be quite a bit deeper than previously thought, and is looking ominously like the early 1980s vintage," said Danny Gabay of Fathom Consulting.
Critics of the Bank of England who called for big interest rate cuts in the first half of last year, will feel justified by the data, since the Bank's monetary policy committee argued into last autumn that there was little likelihood of a recession occurring and delayed rate cuts until October. In fact, the economy had entered one last spring.
Separately, the Trades Union Congress said that while there were signs of "green shoots" in the economy, this was more to do with an easing of the pace of the fall in output rather than that a big recovery was under way.
"This recession is already worse than the 1990s one and is likely to be worse than that of the 1980s," said Richard Excel, TUC labour market expert. "It has been very severe and we are probably only half way through. It will be quite some time until employment and growth return to pre-recession levels."
Paul Gregg, labour market expert from Bristol University, noted that unemployment had started rising earlier in this recession than in previous ones and was "encouraged" that monthly rises in the claimant count appeared to be slowing down.
sourced from The Guardian
The recession facing Britain is even deeper than had been thought and started more than a year ago, it was revealed today.
National income fell in the first quarter of this year by 2.4%, the biggest drop since 1958, as the Office for National Statistics revised its initial estimate of 1.9%.
The figures are much worse than expected. Extended to the whole year, the drop in output in the January to March period is now equal to 4.9% – the worst since records began in 1948.
"We hope the recovery comes as soon as possible but sadly we now know this recession has been longer and deeper than we had thought," said shadow chancellor George Osborne.
"This also means that in the future unemployment will be higher and Labour's debt crisis will be even worse."
Although GDP fell 2.4% in the third quarter of 1979 and first quarter of 1974, statisticians said these were rounded from 2.36% or 2.37%. The figure for this year was exactly 2.4%.
The revision is one of the biggest ever made by the ONS and it said the reasons were changes to its estimate of the construction and services sectors.
The ONS also revised down its figure for the second quarter of last year to -0.1% from zero, meaning the recession started earlier than previously thought. And the fourth quarter of 2008 figure was revised down to a fall of 1.8%.
"The recession, which now begins in the second quarter of 2008 rather than the third, is now thought to be quite a bit deeper than previously thought, and is looking ominously like the early 1980s vintage," said Danny Gabay of Fathom Consulting.
Critics of the Bank of England who called for big interest rate cuts in the first half of last year, will feel justified by the data, since the Bank's monetary policy committee argued into last autumn that there was little likelihood of a recession occurring and delayed rate cuts until October. In fact, the economy had entered one last spring.
Separately, the Trades Union Congress said that while there were signs of "green shoots" in the economy, this was more to do with an easing of the pace of the fall in output rather than that a big recovery was under way.
"This recession is already worse than the 1990s one and is likely to be worse than that of the 1980s," said Richard Excel, TUC labour market expert. "It has been very severe and we are probably only half way through. It will be quite some time until employment and growth return to pre-recession levels."
Paul Gregg, labour market expert from Bristol University, noted that unemployment had started rising earlier in this recession than in previous ones and was "encouraged" that monthly rises in the claimant count appeared to be slowing down.
sourced from The Guardian
UK economy shrinking at fastest rate in more than 50 years
Downward revisions to official statistics show output fell 2.4% in the first three months of the year and the recession started three months earlier than thought
The recession facing Britain is even deeper than had been thought and started more than a year ago, it was revealed today.
National income fell in the first quarter of this year by 2.4%, the biggest drop since 1958, as the Office for National Statistics revised its initial estimate of 1.9%.
The figures are much worse than expected. Extended to the whole year, the drop in output in the January to March period is now equal to 4.9% – the worst since records began in 1948.
"We hope the recovery comes as soon as possible but sadly we now know this recession has been longer and deeper than we had thought," said shadow chancellor George Osborne.
"This also means that in the future unemployment will be higher and Labour's debt crisis will be even worse."
Although GDP fell 2.4% in the third quarter of 1979 and first quarter of 1974, statisticians said these were rounded from 2.36% or 2.37%. The figure for this year was exactly 2.4%.
The revision is one of the biggest ever made by the ONS and it said the reasons were changes to its estimate of the construction and services sectors.
The ONS also revised down its figure for the second quarter of last year to -0.1% from zero, meaning the recession started earlier than previously thought. And the fourth quarter of 2008 figure was revised down to a fall of 1.8%.
"The recession, which now begins in the second quarter of 2008 rather than the third, is now thought to be quite a bit deeper than previously thought, and is looking ominously like the early 1980s vintage," said Danny Gabay of Fathom Consulting.
Critics of the Bank of England who called for big interest rate cuts in the first half of last year, will feel justified by the data, since the Bank's monetary policy committee argued into last autumn that there was little likelihood of a recession occurring and delayed rate cuts until October. In fact, the economy had entered one last spring.
Separately, the Trades Union Congress said that while there were signs of "green shoots" in the economy, this was more to do with an easing of the pace of the fall in output rather than that a big recovery was under way.
"This recession is already worse than the 1990s one and is likely to be worse than that of the 1980s," said Richard Excel, TUC labour market expert. "It has been very severe and we are probably only half way through. It will be quite some time until employment and growth return to pre-recession levels."
Paul Gregg, labour market expert from Bristol University, noted that unemployment had started rising earlier in this recession than in previous ones and was "encouraged" that monthly rises in the claimant count appeared to be slowing down.
sourced from The Guardian
The recession facing Britain is even deeper than had been thought and started more than a year ago, it was revealed today.
National income fell in the first quarter of this year by 2.4%, the biggest drop since 1958, as the Office for National Statistics revised its initial estimate of 1.9%.
The figures are much worse than expected. Extended to the whole year, the drop in output in the January to March period is now equal to 4.9% – the worst since records began in 1948.
"We hope the recovery comes as soon as possible but sadly we now know this recession has been longer and deeper than we had thought," said shadow chancellor George Osborne.
"This also means that in the future unemployment will be higher and Labour's debt crisis will be even worse."
Although GDP fell 2.4% in the third quarter of 1979 and first quarter of 1974, statisticians said these were rounded from 2.36% or 2.37%. The figure for this year was exactly 2.4%.
The revision is one of the biggest ever made by the ONS and it said the reasons were changes to its estimate of the construction and services sectors.
The ONS also revised down its figure for the second quarter of last year to -0.1% from zero, meaning the recession started earlier than previously thought. And the fourth quarter of 2008 figure was revised down to a fall of 1.8%.
"The recession, which now begins in the second quarter of 2008 rather than the third, is now thought to be quite a bit deeper than previously thought, and is looking ominously like the early 1980s vintage," said Danny Gabay of Fathom Consulting.
Critics of the Bank of England who called for big interest rate cuts in the first half of last year, will feel justified by the data, since the Bank's monetary policy committee argued into last autumn that there was little likelihood of a recession occurring and delayed rate cuts until October. In fact, the economy had entered one last spring.
Separately, the Trades Union Congress said that while there were signs of "green shoots" in the economy, this was more to do with an easing of the pace of the fall in output rather than that a big recovery was under way.
"This recession is already worse than the 1990s one and is likely to be worse than that of the 1980s," said Richard Excel, TUC labour market expert. "It has been very severe and we are probably only half way through. It will be quite some time until employment and growth return to pre-recession levels."
Paul Gregg, labour market expert from Bristol University, noted that unemployment had started rising earlier in this recession than in previous ones and was "encouraged" that monthly rises in the claimant count appeared to be slowing down.
sourced from The Guardian
Monday, 9 February 2009
Downturn in the USA
Retail sales fell in December by 2.7 percent, a worse-than-expected number that shows how rising unemployment, stagnant wages and an ongoing housing crisis have undermined one of the basic props of the U.S. economy.
Consumer spending accounts for about two-thirds of U.S. economic activity but has headed down every month since June -- the longest period of decline since the current method of reporting the statistic was adopted in the early 1990s.
U.S. stock indexes dropped on the news, with the Dow Jones industrial average and other major exchanges losing about 1.5 percent in the opening minutes of trading. Losses had reached roughly 3 percent before noon.
read full article sourced from The Washington Post
Consumer spending accounts for about two-thirds of U.S. economic activity but has headed down every month since June -- the longest period of decline since the current method of reporting the statistic was adopted in the early 1990s.
U.S. stock indexes dropped on the news, with the Dow Jones industrial average and other major exchanges losing about 1.5 percent in the opening minutes of trading. Losses had reached roughly 3 percent before noon.
read full article sourced from The Washington Post
Q&A: What is a recession?
The dreaded R-word - recession - is in the air as every day seems to bring more gloomy economic news.
Many commentators are now openly talking about the current slowdown turning into a recession.
But how do economists define a recession and when will we know if the UK is going through one?
What is the definition of a recession?
This is a thorny question on which experts still disagree.
However, technically speaking, the UK economy would slide into recession when it experiences two successive quarters of what is known as "negative growth".
For this to happen, the total amount of goods and services produced by the UK - known as gross domestic product (GDP) - would have to contract on a quarter by quarter basis for a total period of six months.
read full article at The BBC
Many commentators are now openly talking about the current slowdown turning into a recession.
But how do economists define a recession and when will we know if the UK is going through one?
What is the definition of a recession?
This is a thorny question on which experts still disagree.
However, technically speaking, the UK economy would slide into recession when it experiences two successive quarters of what is known as "negative growth".
For this to happen, the total amount of goods and services produced by the UK - known as gross domestic product (GDP) - would have to contract on a quarter by quarter basis for a total period of six months.
read full article at The BBC
Monday, 19 January 2009
Updated: Should we help the banks
Click here to see video of Gordon Brown
Gordon Brown says the government will do 'everything it takes' to support the economy
The Guardian's economics editor, Larry Elliott, assesses the government's latest banking bail-out
We I'm in two minds regarding this, I know that we really don't have any choice but I think the banks the should not only loan to business but also loan to the their customers.
Why should we keep or money in banks, their have wasted / loss billions of pounds in bad deals and investments - so why are we having to help out these private companies.
I don't fully understand but if we loss the banks to who economy would crash, but why use tax payers money. The issue I feel the most strongly about is what is the bank doing with this money, and who is it helping. Is this securing peoples own investments, shares and pensions.
Now I privately rent my flat and I use public transport, so these actions taken by the Government - reducing vat and lowering interest rates has not benefited me at all. Transport cost have in increased by up to 10%, rent has not reduced like peoples mortgages. In the present economic situation you are not really able to ask for a pay rise, because if you have a job you are luck.
When the banks were offering 5 times and 100% mortgages, I was unsure because of the finical commitment. But what I feel is the people that over mortgages them self's either knowingly or accidental have been bald out by the government. But people like me who was not sure I could commit to the monthly re payments is know stuck, because the deposits are so high I can't afford to pay my rent, bills and save for a deposit.
I know that this money to the banks is intended to go towards business, but maybe reduce tax on people earning below £25,000 per years, because this will give people money in their pockets to spend in the high street.
Bank shares in free fall despite bail-out
Bank shares plummeted today amid concerns that the latest government package to stabilise banks and encourage lending would not solve the deepening economic crisis.
Royal Bank of Scotland was the biggest faller in the FTSE 100 share index, its price collapsing by more than 66%, to 11.6p, after it warned ofthe largest loss in British corporate history of up to £28bn and its chief executive, Stephen Hester, admitted that full-scale nationalisation of the bank had been considered.
The taxpayer already owns 58% of RBS but this will soon rise to 68% when £5bn of preference shares owned by the government are converted into ordinary shares.
The first day of dealing in shares of the newly created Lloyds Banking Group resulted in a 34% drop to 65p. The bank, which now has more branches than any of its rivals, issued a trading statement insisting that Lloyds TSB had been trading "satisfactorily", while HBOS, which it rescued in a deal brokered by Gordon Brown, had not suffered any "significant change" in its trading position.
Unlike RBS, Lloyds TSB is not asking the government to convert the preference shares it owns in the combined bank into ordinary shares, which means the taxpayers' stake is staying at 44%.
Eric Daniels, the chief executive of Lloyds, said the bank was "continuing its ongoing constructive dialogue" with the government about the wide range of measures announced today. Among them is a plan to sell insurance to banks to help them cap the losses on loans that have turned sour in the credit crunch.
HSBC, the only bank listed on the stockmarket not to have raised any fresh funds, insisted it would not need to use the government insurance scheme.
"HSBC has not sought capital support from the UK government and cannot envisage circumstances where such action would be necessary," the bank said. "HSBC has long been one of the world's most strongly capitalised banks and is committed to maintaining this position."
Shares in HSBC closed down 6.5% at 501p amid persistent talk that it would need to raise funds, which has been widely predicted since analysts at Morgan Stanley said last week that the bank may need as a much as £20bn of extra funds.
Barclays shares – which lost a quarter of their value in a frenzied hour of trading on Friday – recovered many of their losses early on but closed down another 10%, at 88p.
To participate in the government's insurance scheme, Barclays would need to sell preference shares to the government or find cash to cover the cost of the guarantee. John Varley, the bank's chief executive, is thought to be determined not to sell such shares to the government, even though they would not appear on the bank's shareholder register.
The bank has yet to decide whether to participate in the insurance scheme. Varley said he welcomed the range of announcements today. "The government has worked hard to construct practical and extensive measures to help the UK economy," he said. "The programme is made up of a number of important initiatives in the areas of capital ratios, funding and asset protection."
He added that Barclays would work with the tripartite authorities – the Treasury, the Bank of England and the Financial Services Authority – over the coming days "to understand the detail of the programme and to determine how it can be used to best effect on behalf of customers, shareholders and the wider economy".
RBS expects to use the scheme and Hester admitted today that he expected the bank to be "guinea pig". He admitted total nationalisation of RBS had been discussed with the government. "It was discussed as something we all wish to avoid," he said.
Bruce Packard, banks analyst at the stockbroker Evolution, said: "These share price movements tell you that the government has gone around and said the bank bail-out in October hasn't worked and if they hadn't done that I don't think we'd be in this position.
"I'm a banks analyst and I don't want to criticise the government. They did the right thing in the second half of October but I'm not sure they're doing the right thing now." He has a price target for RBS shares of 18p
sourced from The Guardian
UK banking plan faces criticism
The government's latest plan to counter the economic downturn by encouraging lending has been criticised, and sent banks' shares tumbling.
Opposition MPs argued that the government's measures were inadequate and too many details remained unknown.
Meanwhile Prime Minister Gordon Brown said the move, which centres on state insurance for banks, was essential to help protect jobs.
Business leaders have raised concerns over how much the plan will cost.
The latest government package is the second major set of measures to encourage banks to lend to individuals and businesses, as credit remains scarce or expensive to obtain.
The news sent banking shares down sharply, with Royal Bank of Scotland closing down 67%.
The bank's warning that it could see record losses for 2008 compounded worries about the state of the finance sector.
'Turbulent times'
But the prime minister said that without the new schemes, jobs may have been "needlessly" lost at healthy firms struggling to gain access to necessary funding.
"Good businesses must have access to credit," said the prime minister.
"It is because of this that we are taking the action to expand lending."
Shadow chancellor George Osborne said the details of Monday's package remained a "mystery".
Mr Osborne added that the prime minister "hasn't saved this economy and he hasn't even saved the British banks yet".
Liberal Democrat treasury spokesman Vince Cable said the government's latest plans were inadequate, urging instead for the whole banking sector to be nationalised.
"The government must bite the bullet on the public ownership and control of the banks to ensure that lending is maintained to sound companies who can keep the economy ticking over in these turbulent times," he said.
 |  What we've said is 'you've got to lend about £6bn more to businesses and to people' and the RBS Group have agreed to that  Chancellor Alistair Darling  |
The long list of policies includes a scheme to offer insurance against banks losing more money from the bad debts that started the credit crunch.
Meanwhile, the Bank of England is to be able to buy assets direct from firms.
The government would not reveal how much the latest plan would cost the taxpayer.
Four key points
Here are the key points of the government's latest announcement:
• Banks will be able to take up government insurance against their expected bad debts
• The Bank of England will be able to buy up to £50bn worth of assets in companies in all sectors of the economy
• Northern Rock has been given extra time to repay its loans from the government
• The government is increasing its stake in RBS to nearly 70% from 58%. RBS also said it was set to report a huge loss for 2008, with asset write-downs of up to £20bn.
Insurance plans
Under the insurance scheme, banks will agree with the government the amount they expect to lose from particular debt.
The Treasury will then sell insurance against about 90% of the institutions' additional losses from the debt.
Chancellor Alistair Darling told the BBC that banks taking out the insurance would have to make "very specific legally binding agreements to lend more money".
Under the Bank of England's new role, it will be able to buy up to £50bn of high quality assets, such as bonds and loans, directly from companies
Northern Rock extension
There have also been changes to the terms of previous bank rescues.
The government has given Northern Rock longer to repay its loans from the government.
There was concern that the timetable for repaying the loans was forcing Northern Rock to reduce its mortgage lending too quickly.
Separately, RBS said it had agreed with the Treasury to swap the £5bn of preference shares the government holds for new ordinary shares, increasing the government's stake from 58% to nearly 70%.
The swap will reduce RBS's annual payments to the government as preference shares have a higher guaranteed rate of return than ordinary shares.
sourced from The BBC
Updated: Should we help the banks
Click here to see video of Gordon Brown
Gordon Brown says the government will do 'everything it takes' to support the economy
The Guardian's economics editor, Larry Elliott, assesses the government's latest banking bail-out
We I'm in two minds regarding this, I know that we really don't have any choice but I think the banks the should not only loan to business but also loan to the their customers.
Why should we keep or money in banks, their have wasted / loss billions of pounds in bad deals and investments - so why are we having to help out these private companies.
I don't fully understand but if we loss the banks to who economy would crash, but why use tax payers money. The issue I feel the most strongly about is what is the bank doing with this money, and who is it helping. Is this securing peoples own investments, shares and pensions.
Now I privately rent my flat and I use public transport, so these actions taken by the Government - reducing vat and lowering interest rates has not benefited me at all. Transport cost have in increased by up to 10%, rent has not reduced like peoples mortgages. In the present economic situation you are not really able to ask for a pay rise, because if you have a job you are luck.
When the banks were offering 5 times and 100% mortgages, I was unsure because of the finical commitment. But what I feel is the people that over mortgages them self's either knowingly or accidental have been bald out by the government. But people like me who was not sure I could commit to the monthly re payments is know stuck, because the deposits are so high I can't afford to pay my rent, bills and save for a deposit.
I know that this money to the banks is intended to go towards business, but maybe reduce tax on people earning below £25,000 per years, because this will give people money in their pockets to spend in the high street.
Bank shares in free fall despite bail-out
Bank shares plummeted today amid concerns that the latest government package to stabilise banks and encourage lending would not solve the deepening economic crisis.
Royal Bank of Scotland was the biggest faller in the FTSE 100 share index, its price collapsing by more than 66%, to 11.6p, after it warned ofthe largest loss in British corporate history of up to £28bn and its chief executive, Stephen Hester, admitted that full-scale nationalisation of the bank had been considered.
The taxpayer already owns 58% of RBS but this will soon rise to 68% when £5bn of preference shares owned by the government are converted into ordinary shares.
The first day of dealing in shares of the newly created Lloyds Banking Group resulted in a 34% drop to 65p. The bank, which now has more branches than any of its rivals, issued a trading statement insisting that Lloyds TSB had been trading "satisfactorily", while HBOS, which it rescued in a deal brokered by Gordon Brown, had not suffered any "significant change" in its trading position.
Unlike RBS, Lloyds TSB is not asking the government to convert the preference shares it owns in the combined bank into ordinary shares, which means the taxpayers' stake is staying at 44%.
Eric Daniels, the chief executive of Lloyds, said the bank was "continuing its ongoing constructive dialogue" with the government about the wide range of measures announced today. Among them is a plan to sell insurance to banks to help them cap the losses on loans that have turned sour in the credit crunch.
HSBC, the only bank listed on the stockmarket not to have raised any fresh funds, insisted it would not need to use the government insurance scheme.
"HSBC has not sought capital support from the UK government and cannot envisage circumstances where such action would be necessary," the bank said. "HSBC has long been one of the world's most strongly capitalised banks and is committed to maintaining this position."
Shares in HSBC closed down 6.5% at 501p amid persistent talk that it would need to raise funds, which has been widely predicted since analysts at Morgan Stanley said last week that the bank may need as a much as £20bn of extra funds.
Barclays shares – which lost a quarter of their value in a frenzied hour of trading on Friday – recovered many of their losses early on but closed down another 10%, at 88p.
To participate in the government's insurance scheme, Barclays would need to sell preference shares to the government or find cash to cover the cost of the guarantee. John Varley, the bank's chief executive, is thought to be determined not to sell such shares to the government, even though they would not appear on the bank's shareholder register.
The bank has yet to decide whether to participate in the insurance scheme. Varley said he welcomed the range of announcements today. "The government has worked hard to construct practical and extensive measures to help the UK economy," he said. "The programme is made up of a number of important initiatives in the areas of capital ratios, funding and asset protection."
He added that Barclays would work with the tripartite authorities – the Treasury, the Bank of England and the Financial Services Authority – over the coming days "to understand the detail of the programme and to determine how it can be used to best effect on behalf of customers, shareholders and the wider economy".
RBS expects to use the scheme and Hester admitted today that he expected the bank to be "guinea pig". He admitted total nationalisation of RBS had been discussed with the government. "It was discussed as something we all wish to avoid," he said.
Bruce Packard, banks analyst at the stockbroker Evolution, said: "These share price movements tell you that the government has gone around and said the bank bail-out in October hasn't worked and if they hadn't done that I don't think we'd be in this position.
"I'm a banks analyst and I don't want to criticise the government. They did the right thing in the second half of October but I'm not sure they're doing the right thing now." He has a price target for RBS shares of 18p
sourced from The Guardian
UK banking plan faces criticism
The government's latest plan to counter the economic downturn by encouraging lending has been criticised, and sent banks' shares tumbling.
Opposition MPs argued that the government's measures were inadequate and too many details remained unknown.
Meanwhile Prime Minister Gordon Brown said the move, which centres on state insurance for banks, was essential to help protect jobs.
Business leaders have raised concerns over how much the plan will cost.
The latest government package is the second major set of measures to encourage banks to lend to individuals and businesses, as credit remains scarce or expensive to obtain.
The news sent banking shares down sharply, with Royal Bank of Scotland closing down 67%.
The bank's warning that it could see record losses for 2008 compounded worries about the state of the finance sector.
'Turbulent times'
But the prime minister said that without the new schemes, jobs may have been "needlessly" lost at healthy firms struggling to gain access to necessary funding.
"Good businesses must have access to credit," said the prime minister.
"It is because of this that we are taking the action to expand lending."
Shadow chancellor George Osborne said the details of Monday's package remained a "mystery".
Mr Osborne added that the prime minister "hasn't saved this economy and he hasn't even saved the British banks yet".
Liberal Democrat treasury spokesman Vince Cable said the government's latest plans were inadequate, urging instead for the whole banking sector to be nationalised.
"The government must bite the bullet on the public ownership and control of the banks to ensure that lending is maintained to sound companies who can keep the economy ticking over in these turbulent times," he said.
| What we've said is 'you've got to lend about £6bn more to businesses and to people' and the RBS Group have agreed to that Chancellor Alistair Darling |
The long list of policies includes a scheme to offer insurance against banks losing more money from the bad debts that started the credit crunch.
Meanwhile, the Bank of England is to be able to buy assets direct from firms.
The government would not reveal how much the latest plan would cost the taxpayer.
Four key points
Here are the key points of the government's latest announcement:
• Banks will be able to take up government insurance against their expected bad debts
• The Bank of England will be able to buy up to £50bn worth of assets in companies in all sectors of the economy
• Northern Rock has been given extra time to repay its loans from the government
• The government is increasing its stake in RBS to nearly 70% from 58%. RBS also said it was set to report a huge loss for 2008, with asset write-downs of up to £20bn.
Insurance plans
Under the insurance scheme, banks will agree with the government the amount they expect to lose from particular debt.
The Treasury will then sell insurance against about 90% of the institutions' additional losses from the debt.
Chancellor Alistair Darling told the BBC that banks taking out the insurance would have to make "very specific legally binding agreements to lend more money".
Under the Bank of England's new role, it will be able to buy up to £50bn of high quality assets, such as bonds and loans, directly from companies
Northern Rock extension
There have also been changes to the terms of previous bank rescues.
The government has given Northern Rock longer to repay its loans from the government.
There was concern that the timetable for repaying the loans was forcing Northern Rock to reduce its mortgage lending too quickly.
Separately, RBS said it had agreed with the Treasury to swap the £5bn of preference shares the government holds for new ordinary shares, increasing the government's stake from 58% to nearly 70%.
The swap will reduce RBS's annual payments to the government as preference shares have a higher guaranteed rate of return than ordinary shares.
sourced from The BBC
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)