Banking Bill

I had better declare two interests. First, my wife and I have deposits with the Royal Bank of Scotland. Secondly, I am a supporter of West Ham United, which is currently in Icelandic ownership. To listen to the distinguished former Chancellor, the right hon. and learned Member for Rushcliffe (Mr. Clarke), one would never realise that the debate springs from the failures of market forces and uninhibited competition in this sphere worldwide. The results of the failure are that fanatical advocates of free markets and people who usually denounce public spending and Government intervention have come cap in hand to the Government to ask to be bailed out by the British taxpayer. In other words, some bankers have become the new scroungers and we should recognise them for what they are. I welcome the Bill, which is a second instalment in the attempts to deal with the crisis. The first was the Banking (Special Provisions) Bill, which I remind the House that the Tories opposed. The hon. Member for Tatton (Mr. Osborne), urging us to oppose that Bill, commended the views of the British Bankers Association, which wanted the powers to exist not for a year but simply for a month. Had we taken that short-sighted advice, the Government would have been unable to take the measures to sustain the banking industry and consequently the British economy that they have taken—in taking such measures, the Government have set an example to other countries round the world. We need further instalments beyond the Banking Bill, because it deals with a limited sphere. The people of this country always seek security: in their homes, for their jobs and for their pensions. In recent times, they have seen all of those imperilled by grasping, greedy, arrogant and stupid bankers.