As if we haven’t had enough of the insane ‘bash the banker’ game already… Today a senior Bank of England official – director for Financial Stability Andy Haldane – said the departure of financial institutions and bankers from the UK to avoid the super-tax on bonuses is a ‘price worth paying’ to achieve reform of the sector.

Given that BoE is supposed to be independent and non-political, this is a staggering comment in support of the government-led hostility against the City of London.

A new obsession sweeping the country

Banker bashing has, in the last 12 months, become the new national pastime, sweeping the country like the Spanish Flu. Depressingly, this rush to populism isn’t just confined to the government. Politicians of all parties are in fierce competition to show who is the toughest, the most vengeful on bankers, the modern day witches to be sacrificed and burnt at stake to satisfy the populist thirst for blood.

It’s a no brainer – attacking (‘rich & evil’) bankers is certain to prove popular with voters, who appear to take immense pleasure in castigating the generators of their recent prosperity.

The source of all evil?

Of course, bankers are a convenient scapegoat to divert attention from the government’s own role in the financial and economic meltdown. It wasn’t bankers’ greed and bonuses – as our ministers like to claim – that caused Britain to be on the verge of bankruptcy and having the largest budget deficit in history. For the past 12 years the government has been only too keen to get hands on the massive tax revenues from the finance industry, blowing them on pointless social engineering and ever growing state bureaucracy.

Not surprising then that Gordon Brown is only too happy to divert attention from his own ineptitude and recklessness by painting bankers as greedy little bastards responsible for UK’s economic collapse. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying they have nothing to answer for, just that they are no more to blame than the government, regulators, or, indeed, you and me.

Bonus envy? Let’s see…

And – at the risk of being lynched – I’d argue bankers may deserve to be paid more than many other professionals. You see, of all the people I have known, the bankers are some of the hardest working. 15+ hour days (often 7 days a week) in an extremely competitive, high stress environment, constant pressure to perform, barely any holidays, not to mention no time to spend with their families, not seeing the kids grow up…

So before we succumb to envy of bankers’ compensation, why not consider the sacrifices that go with it. How many of us would really want to trade in? And, who is more deserving of their large salaries and bonuses – the bankers, working 15 hour days in an onerous environment, or the politicians and bureaucrats in their cushy non-jobs with 90 days of holiday a year? And what about the country’s union barons, earning several hundreds of thousands a year for disrupting the economy with constant strikes?

Where do you think the money has come from?

Just a couple of days ago yet another case came alight of a £2.6 million, eight room mansion rented by a London council – at a rent of over £90,000 a year – to house a benefit claimant single mother of eight.  Thanks to our pathetically generous welfare state, not only does she live in a home beyond the wildest dreams of most hard working tax payers, she also receives over £15,000 a year in other benefits, tax free. And there are thousands like her who have not done a day’s work in their lives – and never will – yet live in luxury, courtesy of the tax payer.

Across the country there are over five million of such welfare-addicts, most of whom, having long realized work wouldn’t pay, have dedicated their lives to such favourite activities as drinking and watching TV. (The percentage of UK households where no one works is now a staggering 17%, according to the Office for National Statistics.)

If it wasn’t for the huge tax collected from the City (and its hundreds of thousands of highly paid bankers, traders and other staff) over the last two decades, how would the state have ever gotten its dirty hands on enough money to squander on all the undeserving?

Let’s not forget it’s the financial sector that can be credited for much of the unprecedented wealth that has been created in Britain in the last few decades. The UK – government and public – were profiting from the banking industry without complaint for nearly 20 years, yet didn’t hesitate to turn into a lynch mob overnight. Short memory, or just plain ingratitude?

And what about the role of the debt-addicted public? Most of us were eager to take on loans and credit card debt, remortgage our homes to fund a lifestyle we craved yet knew was beyond our means. Little wonder we’re casting blame while avoiding a look in the mirror – we are as guilty as anyone.

Drive them away and you’ll be sorry…

Like it or not, we need a profitable banking sector, and its billions in taxes – now more than ever. (Public borrowing hit an all-time record high of £20.3 billion in November alone, and yet our political elites act like we don’t need our biggest tax generator.)

Attempting to drive away its biggest cash cow is an act shockingly stupid even for this self-righteous, semi-socialist government. And it’s not just bankers either… Entrepreneurs and other wealth and job creators are equally being made to feel rather unwelcome and unappreciated in the UK these days (punitive taxation, class war & moronic labeling of the ‘bad rich’ aren’t exactly an incentive for anyone to invest their money and talent here).

Given that the 1% of top earners pay 24% of UK income tax and the top 10% pay 54%, and the City contributes 25% of UK corporation taxes, the stupidity of the current policies is mind blowing. And it’s not just about tax – the financial services industry accounts for 21.4% of total employment in the UK, over 6 million out of a total of 29 million workers (according to government statistics).

And yet the government propaganda and most of the masses are happily shouting we don’t need or want bankers in this country. The bad news for us is, there are plenty of countries that welcome enterprising people with open arms, appreciate their skills, and reward hard work with low taxes. Fact is, the UK needs such people far more than they need the UK.

In recent days New York, Frankfurt, Hong Kong, Singapore, Zurich have reportedly  been making an aggressive pitch to financial institutions to move their business from London. Labour’s populism is offering them an unprecedented opportunity to destroy the competitive advantage London has built over the last two decades.

With the country on the verge of bankruptcy and public borrowing out of control, who else is going to pay for the bloated, dysfunctional, inefficient public sector and the millions of welfare addicts? What is supposed to replace the City? Sheep farming, perhaps? Maybe the people now so keen to engage in banker-hatred will start to use their brain (that’s assuming there is any) once their welfare cheques stop coming.

The only thing certain is that the punitive tax raid (bonus tax, 50% income tax, etc) is a purely populist political measure that makes no economic sense (in fact, it comes as close to economic suicide as I’ve ever seen). Not only will it not provide any additional revenue for the taxman, it will cost Britain billions in investment – and taxes – diverted away from London, for many years to come.

I can only hope that at some point sanity will prevail, anger &  hypocrisy will fade, and we will acknowledge banks and bankers for what they are – a vital part of the economy. We should applaud them (and any other businesses) for making money, not demonize them or make them apologize for it.

I’m sure my opinion won’t be very popular… but I’d love to hear your comments! There’s nothing better than a good debate, as long as it’s kept civilized. And, if you enjoyed this post, please share it.

I spent a surprisingly enjoyable evening at the House of Commons on Wednesday. Now, a drinks reception is not the type of place where you’d often find me. In fact, getting me to one usually needs some convincing (or kicking and dragging!). Let’s just say that an event where working the room and small talk are the necessary requisites is about as appealing to me as a visit to the dentist.

But, the theme of the Britain Club evening being crime (and prison reform), and one of the speakers the excellent journalist and author Harriet Sergeant – whose reporting I’ve always respected – I decided to suppress my natural dislike of such events. And you know what? I am glad I did.

That’s not to say working the packed (and a bit claustrophobic) room was the most enjoyable thing I’ve ever done. The crowd was an interesting mix of business people, bankers, consultants, teachers, doctors, and a variety of other UK and foreign professionals, as well as a number of what I’d describe as professional networkers without a clearly defined profession.

As anyone who knows me can attest, as much as I dislike governments (and politicians), I’m always up for debate when it comes to policies and topics that concern people today. And our criminal justice system is one of my favourite targets. (Along with business/red tape/regulation, the outrageous benefits system, excessive taxation, education and healthcare standards, freedom of speech, civil liberties and the nanny state, and…. well, you get the idea… I don’t suffer from a shortage of topics to argue about!)

But, back to the evening at the Parliament… Journalist and author Harriet Sergeant spoke about her investigation of UK’s criminal and education systems. She has been doing a great job in her reporting and it was a pleasure to meet her. You can read her recent damning reports here: Harriet Sergeant reporting.

The author, ex-MP and ex-prisoner Jonathan Aitken spoke about prison reform. Interesting and funny speech too, which is not to say I agree with his ideas on prison reform. See, Mr. Aitken believes the state should rehabilitate criminals with education programmes. As far as I know, those prisoners who are interested in taking part already have access to free education and courses in UK jails. With reoffending rates over 70% within just two years of release, that’s hardly the solution to our wretched criminal justice system.

Worse still, Mr. Aitken suggested that instead of building the sorely needed jails we should put prisoners into hostels to allow them to be more integrated in society. Apparently, it would save money, as housing criminals in hostels is far cheaper than keeping them in prisons. I was going to write ‘It’s a nice idea, but….’ But I can’t. It’s an abhorrent idea, pure and simple.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I hate to see taxpayers’ money being spent on providing all kind of insane comforts for criminals (you should see some UK jails, with plasma TVs etc; prisoners being able to order vegetarian, vegan and ethically sourced food and toiletries, and demand nearly hotel-like standards). That is why I firmly believe all prisoners should be put to work, just like they usually are in the US (or China), to pay for their incarceration cost, medical cost, education, etc. What’s wrong with forcing criminals to work to give something back to society?

In the US, the average cost for housing one prisoner in jail is around $22,000 p.a. or $60 a day. In the UK it’s over GBP40,000 ($66,000 p.a. or $180 a day). I’d say it’s time to cut the fancy TVs and other goodies and put the inmates to work, so that they a) pay for some of their costs and b) find it unpleasant enough not to want to come back.

That said, the very last thing we can afford to do is leave yet more criminals running free – as if there weren’t enough of them already. Recent statistics show that more than 70% of violent criminals aren’t jailed. Serial criminals with multiple convictions are also escaping prison (a Civitas study shows over 60% of those convicted on more than 15 occasions are not sent to prison).

Worse still, serial offenders committing crimes as serious as burglary, robbery and violent attack are handed (repeated) cautions and fines – not even taken to court anymore, much less jailed. According to a Metropolitan Police study, 400,000 criminals who should be sentenced by courts are instead given a fine or caution every year.

In 2007 just 24% of all serious criminals were sent to prison (Civitas report, using government figures). Those who are sentenced receive pathetically short sentences (including for murders), and, to make it worse, are then automatically released in mid term (or less).

I’m always amazed when people react with shock to my arguments that instead of mollycoddling them, we should punish criminals with severity. There are few things that make me more furious than seeing criminals being set free (with a slap on the wrist), while their victims (and future victims) are neither protected nor see any justice being done.

Isn’t it time we stopped worrying about criminals’ comforts and human rights and started caring about the victims instead? In my opinion, people give up their rights the moment they commit a crime. Sadly, our liberal elites don’t seem to share that opinion.

It’s not as if, in this absence of a properly functioning police and judicial system, we, the public, are allowed to protect ourselves. Those few that do tend to see the full force of our criminal justice come down on them. Like the disabled 71 year old grandmother who poked a thug in the chest with her finger, only to be promptly convicted of assault, receiving a criminal record. And thousands of other law-abiding citizens like her with similar experiences.

With all the political correctness, human rights laws and other liberal dogmas, it seems the concept of punishing criminals is no longer popular. Clearly, neither the ridiculous sentencing in this country nor the comfortable standards in jails can be considered a punishment, by any measure.

I’d love to hear your opinion… Are we too soft on crime? Can criminals be successfully rehabilitated, or should we focus on putting them away and protecting the public instead?

For now let’s just say that the least politically correct person to probably ever have set foot in the Westminster Parliament thoroughly enjoyed this week’s event, including disagreeing with most of the fellow attendees.

So now we know it – much of the global warming drama is nothing but a scam.

Earlier this month, hackers exposed hundreds of emails and documents from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) – one of the world’s leading climate change research centres – that appear to prove researchers faked and manipulated statistics.

The issue is, CRU’s research and archive of global temperature data form the basis of United Nation’s key reports on climate change. Therefore, if the data was fabricated or corrupted, the models supporting the global warming theory would also have been compromised.

The popular consensus is that global warming a) exists and b) is caused by human activity and industrialization. There are skeptics – even among scientists – disputing this thesis, and there has been plenty of data supporting a theory that global warming (and cooling) periods are caused by solar activity.

There has been a lack of an open debate on the issue, but that might change now. The leak of the damaging emails, causing a sensation around the globe, has been seized upon by global warming skeptics. I freely admit to being one of them.

CRU has for years been refusing to publish details of its temperature research data, so the exposed emails certainly don’t look very good. In some of them Phil Jones, CRU’s director, appears to suggest a ‘trick’ to ‘hide the decline’ of temperatures and lack of any warming.

So is this “the greatest act of scientific fraud in history”, as some US pundits have called it? It’s too early to tell for sure. But at least we might see an honest debate now, hopefully before governments start wasting trillions of tax payers’ money on (possibly) unnecessary legislation and measures.

Or perhaps I’m just being overly optimistic.

So here we have them… the first EU President and High Representative for Foreign Affairs (aka foreign minister). Two obscure figures – staunch federalist Herman van Rompuy, keen on shifting more and more powers to Brussels (including rights for the EU to impose taxes) and Baroness Ashton, a non-entity bureaucrat with zero experience or knowledge of foreign affairs.

Not elected, of course – this is the European Union after all and not some democratic institution – but selected, behind closed doors, to rule over 500 million people. Just as bullying Ireland into repeating a plebiscite (a result of which was not to Brussels’ liking), this was simply another step in the undemocratic farce the EU has morphed into.

As far as I can recall, nobody has asked voters in this country whether they want an EU President, or foreign minister, or a European constitution/Lisbon Treaty for that matter. No, voters’ views simply don’t matter when it comes to the EU. It is extraordinary how a fundamentally good idea of a single market has been bastardised into the biggest slap in the face for democracy.

Having denied its people the promised referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, the government surrendered British sovereignty to the European Union. EU courts and unelected – as well as unaccountable – officials supersede the democratically elected national governments. National veto powers have been axed, leaving us at the mercy of an unelected politburo in Brussels. EU now has control over British foreign policy, military and defence, immigration, criminal justice, social and employment laws and many other policy areas. The path to a complete federalisation of the EU is set, national sovereignty irretrievably lost.

Now that the Lisbon Treaty has been ratified, the next – Conservative – government (there goes hope!) should focus on regaining for the UK some of the sovereign powers and competences in key areas. And, as that is unlikely to succeed, calling a referendum on whether to stay in the EU or opt out only seems appropriate.

According to the TaxPayer’s Alliance, the EU costs each of us £2,000 a year. It seems particularly bad value given the ever growing red tape, bureaucracy and out-of-control regulations and directives that are imposed on us. Should the British people ever get the chance to vote on opting out, my guess is that UK’s days in the EU would be numbered.