John Redwood: say no to partial nationalisation
On the same morning that David Cameron signalled Conservative support for "drastic capital measures" which woul dsee the taxpayer offering to take an equity stake in banks, John Redwood denounced such a plan on his blog.
There is no case whatsoever to nationalise more banks, let alone for taxpayers to be made to take equity stakes in all the banks. There is a new kind of madness stalking the government world, as the governments lurch from one inappropriate response to another in response to a fast moving banking crisis.

Let us not forget that John Redwood wrote, as recently as last year, that Government had no role in regulating mortgage lending because all the financial risk was taken by the lender.
Posted by: David Boothroyd | 8 Oct 2008 09:44:20
I don't want to tell you how to do your Job Red Box, but you'r behind the Times.
From John Redwoods Website Oct the 6th
Governments should look after taxpayers. Taxpayers cannot afford to nationalise the banks. If governments assume too many new risks by taking on the assets of the banks or buying them up, it merely shifts the problems from the private sector to the public sector. It does not solve it. The problem will then become how do governments pay all the bills? How can they finance themselves in a non inflatonary way? How high do taxes have to go? A banking crisis does not suspend the laws of public finance. Buying bank shares is just like hiring teachers or buying more paperclips for a government office - only less popular with the taxpayer.
October the eight
At last the authorities have woken up to the scale of the problems in the money and banking markets. Any sensible person this morning wishes the government’s plan well and hopes it will succeed. Let me begin with some supportive points.
Spot the difference
Click on
www.johnredwoods diary.com for more
Posted by: david1 | 9 Oct 2008 11:14:53
stick to wilderness where you belong, mr redwood.
Posted by: watson | 10 Oct 2008 09:16:11
Is Mr Redwood still basking in ideology?
Even the Republican US President (never mind his popularity, or the lack of it, courtesy of the Iraq War etc) is for intervention, with the $700bn bailout.
The situation is extreme. An extreme solution is therefore justified.
I am glad we do not have Mr Redwood as the leader of the Conservatives.
Posted by: Naresh Tanna | 10 Oct 2008 20:37:03
Is Mr Redwood still basking in ideology?
Even the Republican US President (never mind his popularity, or the lack of it, courtesy of the Iraq War etc) is for intervention, with the $700bn bailout.
The situation is extreme. An extreme solution is therefore justified.
I am glad we do not have Mr Redwood as the leader of the Conservatives.
Posted by: Naresh Tanna | 10 Oct 2008 20:38:03
Is Mr Redwood still basking in ideology?
Even the Republican US President (never mind his popularity, or the lack of it, courtesy of the Iraq War etc) is for intervention, with the $700bn bailout.
The situation is extreme. An extreme solution is therefore justified.
I am glad we do not have Mr Redwood as the leader of the Conservatives.
Posted by: Naresh Tanna | 10 Oct 2008 20:38:22
I'm not sure what equity stakes are but I guess this is about the taxpayer having some stake in the banks. If the government bought shares then I think it's a good thing. Shareholders can influence the workings of any company including banks. But if the shares would be sold as soon as the banks got out of trouble then I see no advantage.
Posted by: Giana | 10 Oct 2008 21:26:48
John Redwood is quite right, the banks should not be " Nationalised under any basis" it goes without saying, thus only encourages the black markets to become even stronger, one wonders if this is what, this curent market situation is all about. It should be noted " The Hawks are in full circle, the wheels on the bus go round and round.
Posted by: jennifer leyton purrier | 11 Oct 2008 23:11:35
Is this the same ineffectual ponce who pretend-mouthed the words to the Welsh national anthem like a forlorn schoolboy? Can anything he says ever be taken seriously?
Posted by: Seb Carroll | 12 Oct 2008 01:07:39
The only sensible comment made by a british politician regarding the banking crisis. The banks made foolish loans to foolish people and now the chickens are coming home to roost. While there are many personal hardships in a recession the bust will take assets away from badly run companies and place them in the hands of well run companies. For all their bleating, unsound banks going bust does NOT signal that mankind will go the way of the dodo! It may even signal a return away from fractional reserve banking and a return to hard currency.
Posted by: The Austrian Economist | 12 Oct 2008 02:31:08
As you appear to be so critical of the Labour Governments approach, what would you propose then Mr Redwood?
The answer is nothing. The precise reason why the Conservatives have been so notably mute on the issue. They do not have an answer to the current crisis and as a result are scratching their heads. Well I say keep on scratching. It will take you one hell of a long time to devise a Right Wing answer.
It is clear that senior Tories are still madly wedded to Thatcherism. God help us if they form the next Government.
It appears that Redwoods very reaction is symbolic of the fact that the Conservatives are totally out of touch with the times and are totally and utterly unfit for Public Office.
Posted by: James Thurston | 12 Oct 2008 04:25:49
Mr Redwood was an amazingly bad and without doubt the worst Sec of State for Wales -you can see why.This was his first entry into frontline politics -some of us who worked with him thought he acted bizarrely in making decision on Wales.
John Redwood is deeply flawed in political judgement.
Posted by: ryderwave | 12 Oct 2008 12:02:45
What you haven't picked up on is that John Redwood actually doctored his entry to make it look less like an attack on David Cameron - you can see this here http://toryparty.net/wordpress/?p=178
Posted by: Toryparty | 12 Oct 2008 13:07:36
JOHN
Your are correct.
this is the first step to
one world govenment.
one world leader
that is what mandelson wants he is dangerous
Robert
Posted by: R F ASBURY | 12 Oct 2008 16:13:56
Lots of head-bangers posting here I see.
My eye was caught by the "John Redwood is quite right" of jennifer leyton purrie. Perhaps the creator of the chamber pot liner thinks that worried bankers might need her product?
http://www.wikipatents.com/gb/2248180.html
Posted by: my-m | 13 Oct 2008 08:06:06
Our steel, coal, car and aircraft industries, our railways and postal services provide clear proof that nationalisation, no matter how temporary, is a fatal disease.
Posted by: Brian Christley. Abergele | 13 Oct 2008 12:09:47
MY-M, do you Google every name that appears in comments pages? Creepy.
Posted by: Gilmore Schjeldahl | 13 Oct 2008 13:05:34
Before anyone else applauds Gordon Brown's financial expertise, I suggest they should read the Spectator magazine's recent exposure of the borrowings he had concealed during his term as Chancellor of the Exchequer that had hiked Britain's true national debt to over £950-billion even before the Global bail-out began.
Bringing the twice-discredited and perhaps even more disliked Peter Mandelson back into his Cabinet further endorses Gordon's inability to lead the nation out of a paper bag
Posted by: Dogsbody | 16 Oct 2008 00:26:41