Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#1
This morning all over the news our vince cable stated the banks were holding back progress, and need sorting out.
just 5 minutes ago cameron on radion/news saying, nope no rush to sort the banks till end of review.
blimey mate there in this cobbled together govt together yet cant even talk with one voice.
another u turn
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#2
looks to me like the top yellows are trying to distance themselves from the cobbled together government keith.
i think they will leave cleggy cut adrift and stuck with dave while the rest of the party regroup and plan a new start.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#3
and if that happens then the cobbled together govt will be no more as they wont be able to command control
the clocks ticking,,,,,,
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#4
Do calm yourself, you do get over excited and if you carry on like this you will do yourself a damage.
Cable is a loose cannon who should be kicked out of the government as he is just not up to the job.
This is not a big deal.....
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#5
Further to above. I have just read something on the Speccie that points out just what a mixed up man Cable is. He really cannot make his mind up.....
In the words of the Speccie
"""Not only does he plunge his teeth into the exposed flesh of the bankers (criticising them for their "special pleading" over banking reforms), but he also offers another overarching diagnosis of the British economy (there won't be a repeat of 2008's financial crisis, he says, in case you were wondering, but slow growth could be a problem). I feel like a spoilsport for pointing out that, only four months ago, the Business Secretary was actually warning that "you can see" another financial crash happening.""
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#6
the spectator indeed barry, i am sure that they would not put spin on it like the grauniad.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#7
Vince Cable is right, the banks need to undergo further regulation. Tha banks have to be accountable for what they do in terms of investing money, they cannot expect the tax-payer to bail them out when something goes wrong!
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#8
Of course they do Howard, but this is a matter of what contradictory things Cable has actually said..... its speaks for itself without spin.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
#9
Well Cable would be reshuffled if they could, but they cant. Decent calibre Libdems are thin on the ground so he is likely to stay. He may be a bitter pill for the Conservatives to swallow whole but wholly swallow they must. Clarke on the other hand, as mentioned on another thread, will be walking the proverbial plank afore tooo long as there are lots of willing Tories eager for advancement. They're chomping at the bit. But back to Cable, he would have been shifted way back when he made those unprofessional revelations about Sky to two young girls...but they slithered him sideways. Conclusive proof that he has his boots in concrete under the Ministerial desk.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#10
paulb;
your dead right mate whilst many leading tories agree cable hould go
the whole cobbled together govt is being held together wafer thin and the lib dems wont put up with him going.
cameron knows it, so they will just publicly disagree, what a shambles, and who's right, ?
all looks a bit messy to me
another leaderless dave issue
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#11
Ah Keith, you do keep on....as I said before do calm down. Your first prediction of an election in 18 months is about to pass but you still keep hoping. Much as I would like to see DC get an overall majority sooner not later the election is 3 to 4 years away.
PaulB - I was amused by your relating Cable to 'decent quality LibDems' - I don't argue with your analysis about the sparse talent in the LibDem ranks but to suggest that Cable might be of 'decent calibre' stretches the imagination.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#12
Leaderless Dave can see all around him the cobbled together govt falling apart
not long now, and certainly wont last the full term
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
#13
I have to admit oul Vince's credibility has slipped from its one time lofty reverence. He was for a time considered the wise old man of politics, a guru on all things financial. The press and TV all bought into that and welcomed him on all shows with cap tipping reverence, and we all lovingly called him Uncle Vince too, as he was wise and ermm sorta cuddly.
But as happens very often, those who offer hope slip furthest.
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
#14
There are calls for Cameron to reasert his authority over the LibDems by reminding them that they only managed to poll a quarter of the vote.
I think many Tory bigwigs are saying enough is enough as the Libs put forward a number of proposals firstly Uncle Vince wants the mansion tax, renewing his pledge to soak the rich. Next, he promises to resist the Chancellor's plan to cut the 50p top rate of income tax.
Then there is the land tax on residents in desirable areas and also the controversial 'tipple tax' on every drink sold in a pub.
Latest stats show that households £11 a week worse off than last year, retail sales flat and 25 pubs closing each week. Well done the coalition.
The funny thing is that the Libs are also trying to put water between themselves and the Tories as the season of the party conferences kicks off in a few weeks time. ''It's not our fault guv''
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#15
PAULB;
But with this comes ther two parties fall out on so many issues, and if they cant have there own ministers getting on then how is this cobbled together govt ever going to last.
vince has a view some what different to that of mr cameron clearly shown in the 2 interviews.
now its clear that mr cable isnt going to go away and as much as the tories will want to silence him i cant see him shutting up.
so we therefore have a cobbled together govt all falling out big time,
and the clocks tick
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#16
I think Cameron will get rid of Cable as soon as he can. He will of course have to sacrifice one of his own at the same time. How about Ken Clarke?
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
#17
Banks appauling behaviour is one of the main reasons blamed for the financial situation we are experiencing and why the Banking reform must be implemented immediately
Cameron and Osbourne are backing the Bankers following intensive lobbying from Bank Chiefs to sweep the reform under the carpet until 2015.Election year.
Senior Conservatives are nervous that the Public will see that the Tories are to cosy and close to the Bankers.!!Surprise Surprise!!
Clegg and Cable want implementation which will ringfence the Banking Retail system from the damaging Investment sector of Banking.The `Casino` Johnies.
Economic Growth has not happened since Osbournes spending review and VAT increase.
Lib/Dems may be bought off their direct disagreement with Cameron and Osbourne by accepting that the Reform being put on the Statute Book thereby avoiding the Reform being scuppered with a change of Government!!!! ie.On the back burner and tucked away!!!!
What is good for the Nation being sidestepped to keep the Coalition partners in Power.
Is this the way to run a Dance Hall?
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#18
Change the tune Reg - no-one is fooled any more by this use of the banks as scapegoats for Brown's insane spending spree and total incompetence.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#19
reg is right that the banks have to be more responsible for their behaviour.
one minute they are throwing money at people that could never repay, now they stifle small businesses from expanding and young people from getting a mortgage for their first one bedroomed flat.
i will leave economic growth for another time.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#20
They cannot win, accused one minute of lending too freely and the next of being too strict!
The main problem, Howard, were not their lending policies as such, though in some cases they did leave a lot to be desired, but more the manner in which they expanded their operations particularly into America. RBS in particular went on a spending spree buying up some small American banks and inherited their bad debts, some of which originated with a policy of Clinton's that opened up lending to people who previously could not borrow. OK, that is an over simplification and there are a whole range of other factors with the way toxic debt was packaged and incorrectly rated etc some of which was criminal activity in the USA, at least one person was imprisoned for it.
The other thing to remember though was that the regulatory changes made by Brown reduced the level of scrutiny over their business expansion activities that would otherwise have been hindered or even prevented by the BoE. Incidentally, Brown also went on to urge the banks to go out and do that kind of thing in a famous, or rather infamous speech at the Mansion House.