[Re: Standard Chartered is the victim of US warfare against British banking, yesterday]
John Mann is correct. US regulatory pressure is unfair, excessive, and unbalanced, and solely seeks to protect US self-interests. The UK government should protect British interests unequivocably. We shouldn’t fear the loss of the strategic partnership, especially if it is used by one side as a means of arm-twisting the other.
The US political trend to blame the British pre-dates this current election season. We shouldn’t forget Obama’s frequent references to “British Petroleum”, after BP’s Deepwater Horizon crisis in the Gulf of Mexico.
[Re: After Lib Dem-Tory splits on constitutional reform, will the coalition last until 2015, yesterday]
Mark Field is wrong to assume that the coalition’s “central economic purpose” will hold it together. Any blind man can see that it won’t last its full course. The closer it gets to a new election, the more the Lib Dem panic will set in. They’ll leave in droves towards the end.
I don’t think many people care if the coalition will last. It has no public support, shocking economic credentials, and it’s only attractive because it stands in the way of government by Ed Miliband.
It’s up to UK regulators, not US, to show that they are determined to learn lessons and clean up quickly, vigorously and transparently.
Mervyn King blames the euro and oil prices for weak growth. He doesn’t mention consumers squeezed by inflation and the weak pound.
I’m not sure David Cameron is the kind of visionary leader who can outline a new economic path for the UK. He tinkers at best.
The government says it will put 110 per cent into saving the economy. That’s all you need to know about its business acumen.