Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

How not to organise a bank rescue

Tuesday 14 March 1995 19:02 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

If you think Barings is bad, just look at what Jean Peyrelevade, one of the disaster-prone merchant bank's non-executive directors, has to cope with at home. As executive chairman of Credit Lyonnais, he is presiding over what in UK terms would be the equivalent of rescuing Lloyds or Midland Bank using state funds. Much is being made of the contrast; the billions being sunk into Credit Lyonnais and the decision here in Britain to allow Barings to go to the wall. The two cases only bear superficial comparison, however.

Credit Lyonnais is already controlled by the government; only a minority stake is traded on the stock exchange, in the form of investment certificates. It is almost certainly true that if a similar disaster struck here, the UK Government would also orchestrate a bail-out of any of our top half dozen private sector clearing banks.

The difference from the Barings case, where the Government stood back and allowed the bank to go into administration, is that the big clearers have huge numbers of depositors and are at the core of the payments system.

If the money they hold on deposit is frozen or lost, it would be highly damaging for a very large number of people, including the other banks they deal with, some of which might be brought down as a consequence. That was not true of Barings.

But while it may be common ground between the UK and French governments that both would prop up a major deposit taker, where detail is concerned, Credit Lyonnais is rapidly becoming a textbook case of how not to organise a rescue. Despite all that has happened Credit Lyonnais has been left largely intact, deciding its own timetables for asset disposals, and in the latest scheme transferring tens of billions of francs worth of lossmaking loans into a new company underwritten by the state.

It is a situation the airline industry is only too familiar; the pricing and marketing of the efficient is undermined by state subsidised firms protected from the marketplace The European Commission may now open an investigation into state aid for Credit Lyonnais, after complaints from French rivals.

Excessive competition and ready availability of capital have too often been the real reasons behind bad lending. Bank rescues should be about short-term protection for customers, not the organisations themselves, which as likely as not deserve to be broken up, run down or sold.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in