Monday, Nov 02, 2009

Taxpayer sponsored revival

Guardian: Northern Rock - Why should taxpayers be paying to inflate the housing market?

"Whatever all those bankers are putting in the tea over at HM Treasury, it must be pretty strong stuff. How else can you explain the bizarre decision today to spend £8bn of taxpayers money on re-inflating the housing market? I thought I was having a hallucination myself when I first saw the announcement this morning, but no, this is exactly what it seems: the government is proposing to invest yet more of our money in the infamously over-extended Northern Rock to allow it to lend guess what? - yes, more mortgages.
Chief executive Gary Hoffman was very clear when I asked him about it too: the aim is to support the housing market, which he says is weaker than it looks, and make the bank more valuable when time comes to sell it."

Posted by wanderinman @ 07:14 PM (1891 views)
Add Comment
Report Article


1. devo said...

"Lloyds is asking the government for another £5bn too, yet not necessarily to grow its business lending, but to escape more government control."


Monday, November 2, 2009 07:23PM Report Comment

2. paul said...

This is staggering.

Can you imagine the car industry asking the government for a loan so that it doesn't have to cut the prices it charges on the cars it makes?

Who's to say this isn't MPs simply padding out the values of their taxpayer-funded second homes?

Monday, November 2, 2009 07:35PM Report Comment

3. estrader said...

Some of the comments I read are frightening. It is obvious that the general public just doesn't 'get' it which means Gordon Brown has every chance of winning the next election. People actually think a credit crunch and recession happens for no apparent reason or that they are an act of nature!

• “Chaz1 has it right: we are now in a credit squeeze so more credit in the economy is required. The government have done the right thing (again). There is also no need for a public spending squeeze in a recession. If boom times return again then of course the lending tap can be turned off, interest rates put up, taxes up, banks sold off, public spending down, whatever it takes. But we are **not there now**.”

Monday, November 2, 2009 08:52PM Report Comment

4. mark wadsworth said...

Normally the Guardian is reliably wrong, but a lot of their writers are spot on when it comes to housing (this chap, Larry Elliott and Ashley Seager spring to mind).

Monday, November 2, 2009 09:05PM Report Comment

5. mken said...

spare quid for Royal Mail?

Monday, November 2, 2009 10:36PM Report Comment

6. James said...

Govt taking the micky again with our money. What about the millions of people who have lost there jobs because of brown's economic mismangement and his obession with inflating house prices to create the feel good factor with middle briton? Seems to have forgoten his working class roots. What a fake..

Tuesday, November 3, 2009 12:03AM Report Comment

7. a saver said...

The election can't come soon enough.
But I'm worried that the over-indebted sheeple will vote Labour and prolong our misery.

Tuesday, November 3, 2009 07:27AM Report Comment

8. paul said...

Interesting how the BBC is keeping quiet about this. Normally they'd be trumpeting it from the rooftops. Only this time they've got a very real incentive to keep quiet about it for the government.

Tuesday, November 3, 2009 08:08AM Report Comment

9. need-a-crash said...

@3. estrader

With the exception of Chaz1 I'd say most of the comments on the Guardian website are in line with our thinking. In fact there almost seems to be a revolutionary tone to them, which is rarely seen on this site... Perhaps the population is waking up at last?

Tuesday, November 3, 2009 01:01PM Report Comment

10. tenant super said...

Re. comments about the election; I used to feel the same, that 5 more years of GB and New Lab would be terrifying but things are so shafted, I wonder whether they can get any worse. I also doubt the conservatives ability to make any improvements. Life long Tory voters like me are abandoning Cameron. this won't make any difference where I live (Lobour Stronghold Southwark) but it could scupper things in the marginals. A comment recently on a Telegraph article sums up how I feel (apart from the silly suggestion that Cameron would defect):

"The best hope for conservative values is that UKIP draw enough votes to deny Cameron the keys to number 10. We suffer five more years of Brown, but we will have the same policies whoever wins so that is no loss. As a result of his defeat Cameron will lose the leadership of his party and probably defect to his natural home in the Labour party, taking the Cameroons with him. Traditional Conservatives and UKIP will join forces, perhaps calling themselves Conservatives, perhaps not."

If enough Tory voters vote UKIP in the marginals and super-marginals, the seats could go to Labour. This could lead to a Labour win or hung parliament. Some voters will realise this and vote Conservative as its the lesser of two evils, but many others like myself, vote on principles and not strategically.

Tuesday, November 3, 2009 01:03PM Report Comment

11. tenant super said...

* (Labour Stronghold Southwark) even! Sorry for the sloppy typos there!

Tuesday, November 3, 2009 01:04PM Report Comment

Add comment

  • If you do not have an admin password leave the password field blank.
  • If you would like to request a password allowing you to add comments and blog news articles without needing each one approved manually, send an e-mail to the webmaster.
  • Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
  • Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of
  • Please adhere to the Guidelines
Admin Password
Email Address

Main Blog | Archive | Add Article | Blog Policies