Recently in Banking sector Category

I'm no royalist, but I was rather charmed by the Diamond Jubilee, in the main.  I couldn't face the ghastly concert thing (Macca and "Oh-bla-di" I ask you!!!), but I watched the whole of the wet flotilla.  And in common with most of us I suspect, I was not charmed by the inane coverage by the BBC, (rightly slammed for being fatuous, dumbed-down and gratuitously jolly), but hugely charmed by the central figure, our tiny monarch, her staunch professionalism, her radiant smile through it all. But didn't it go on and on?  A wonderful Tweet went out yesterday which read "Day 4 of bloody Jubilee. Now everybody knows how it feels to sit through an Indian wedding".  You have to laugh. 

The sainted Keith Mitchell of Peter Brett Associates (transport engineers and environmental consultants to those of a thoughtful and philosophical bent) has written a seminal series of articles for UKR which are pretty well required reading if you want a real-world take on what is going on in the infrastructure arena.  
 
We haven't heard much comment on the National Infrastructure Plan in recent weeks and I was reminded of this when listening to Stuart Fraser of the City of London and Brendan Barber of the TUC debating the future of banking on R4 Today programme on Friday morning (now bear with me here).  There seems to be a consensus emerging that the City has become a global leviathan, and that "British banking" (or banking services for Britain) is something of an endangered species.  (Rather amusingly, the Today programme juxtaposed this item with a piece about the terminal decline of certain Gaelic dialects on the islands of Lewis and South Uist, without any obvious sense of irony whatsoever). Indeed, we recently - unconsciously - picked this up in the EG/UKR Build a Better Britain Regeneration Commission in the last few months, with our idea for a "local investors club". 
 
My thesis is this: the (uncertain) future for British banking and the National Infrastructure Plan are two strands of activity vital to rebuilding the British economy, surely? Couldn't we usefully consider them together, just for a moment or two?  As Keith Mitchell has commented, we "really welcome the push on infrastructure, but the net additional money and new starts in the short term seem limited, with reliance on longer-term money via the pension funds".  And it does seem to be something of a mystery as to whether the pension fund proposition is a reworked PFI or something else.  Just how will it work?  There is much muttering about putting the pension funds to work locally but I haven't as yet seen a readily accessible model. 

Curtin & Co (the political and community consultation specialists) held an event at the House of Commons a couple of weeks ago, and my very good mate Aonghus Curtin was kind enough to send me the ensuing press release. C&C always do well in attracting good speakers and this occasion was no exception. It had the redoubtable Angela Knight CBE, the chief executive of the British Bankers Association to speak to its client group of property developers and planners. It seems to have been a huge success if, perhaps, neglecting to present much in the way of real solutions.

 Ms Knight was clearly in bullish mode, maintaining that UK banks are in a much stronger position to lend again than in the past three years. She said that banks were operating in a tough market (something of an understatement, I think you'll agree), but the UK's biggest lenders were better placed than their European Counterparts (whew! That's a relief then, given the circs in Greece and Portugal!). Needless to say, senior executives in the housebuilding industry who were present raised their usual concerns (bleats) over the ability of banks to release capital for future development, as well as the difficult mortgage market. And in response, Ms Knight acknowledged the need for greater mortgage lending, stating there were "no immediate answers but that thinking was under way". Addressing the criteria for lending, Ms Knight said that banks would lend at a "fixed percentage of the firesale value", but highlighted the need for closer co-operation between banks and businesses in their quest to secure further finance.

The sun is shining; London is in blossom. Is it just me, or do things seem to be a little better? I guess we'll see.

I have been attempting to follow the proceedings of Sir John Vickers' Independent Commission on Banking, which produced its initial report today, to see what it will all mean for the UK economy and for our poor people. I know there is much to digest, and the devil is not even in the detail but in the nuances, but I would be inclined to agree with some of the commentary over the weekend: let's call the bluff of the big players and see what happens.

It is an understatement of fairly monumental proportions that our country and our people have not been served by the banking industry, structured as it is. It is a disgrace. And, unless we learn from our mistakes, and fundamentally change the structure of banking, we are doomed to get into a 2008 mess all over again.

Of course, I also need to understand what is going on with the banking sector in my mission to become Big Money in pursuit of Saving Regeneration.

And I have to say, contrary to what you might think from the press, that my direct experience of dealing with these organisations is actually rather positive. I may have been knocking around for a long time (not a peep from the back), but this is the first time I have had a direct relationship with the banks in any sort of serious funding capacity. And I am quietly encouraged by the behaviour shown toward me of the real estate departments of the big banks (including those that are threatening to leave the country).