A State of Recklessness - Part I

"The latest bank rescue deal could take Mr. Brown’s total commitment to solving the banking crisis to almost £1trillion (£1,000 billion) in taxpayer’s money either spent or pledged since the credit crunch began in 2007."
[The Trillion Pound Bail out, Daily Mail 19th January 2009.]

"Within less than a week it was announced that a £50 billion fund will be used to effectively purchase companies' debts and even give them extra cash. The companies can in turn use the money they receive to fund their operations. The scheme was announced last week as part of the Government's latest package of bail-out measures to prop up the economy."
Another day, yet another bail-out: £50bn to rescue ailing firms

Gordon Brown, our former Chancellor, claimed "I warned of global financial crisis ten years ago" shortly after boasting in the Commons that he had 'saved the global financial system.' But wasn’t it Brown himself who had presided over the relaxation of the regulatory framework of the financial sector in 1997? In a further insult to voters, he insisted that the recession and recent job losses were just the'difficult birth pangs of a new global order.’ What I find illogical is the fact that this Government relaxed its regulation of the banking/financial services sector whilst applying its regulatory muscle to the minutiae of every day living. For example:
Families who overfill their bins fined more than shoplifters under Government-backed plans and Spies check bins to see if families are wasting food. Additionally we learn of a teenager given a £50 fine for littering whilst the Nanny State targets drinkers in a £10 million anti binge drinking campaign and the Liverpool Echo reported on 2nd January that: 'SMOKERS have paid close to £100,000 in fines in just eight months for dropping cigarette buttson City streets. Get tough Liverpool Council has made £98,625 - more than £10,000 a month - from fixed penalty notices handed out from May 2008.'

Is state interference of this type justified and is it really the role of Government?

Well according to one ideology the role of Government is to protect the common wealth and protect the common health for this and future generations.

This prompts the following questions:

Has Government protected the common wealth of this Nation by over-regulating the daily lives of individuals whilst turning a blind eye to the reckless lending policies of those in charge of our financial sector?



Does common wealth have the same meaning as financial capital?

In the second part of this article I shall begin presenting the potential answers to these important questions.

Link to article> Lloyds shares halve in value on nationalisation fears

Martin R. Hensman M.Inst.L.Ex, LLB (Hons)