The BofE: ready to bail out the banks ‘too big to fail’ – again!

 

Now we know why there were no leaks from the Treasury, why there were no excited gossipy articles about what all Hunt was going to do. What was this again about a mountain being pregnant and bringing forth a mouse? 

Good old ‘staff’ at the BBC has come up with this: “Newspaper headlines: Hunt ‘defies gloom’ and ‘Giveaway for the 1%’.” (link). To no-one’s surprise it’s the grauniad wailing about about yon ‘giveaway for the 1%’. Well, the 1% mostly profiting from this ‘giveaway’, the ‘lifting of the pension cap’, are the public servants, or rather the top level employees thereof. So be careful, grauniad: these are your readers!

Frankly, scanning the frontpage headlines, in print or online, is as mind-blowingly boring as the budget itself. There’s nothing we can do about it except pay. The tediousness of the coming ‘debates’ in Parliament will only reinforce the impression that they all live in a glorious bubble, perched on the top of a modern-day Mount Olympus where nothing can touch them. I can only agree with Fraser Myers’ interpretation in ‘spiked online’ when he writes that “The UK chancellor has managed to produce the most lacklustre, most uninspiring and most dispiriting budget of the modern age.” (link)

Hunt and the government, together with the Treasury, is patting itself on the back for this bland, ‘safe’ budget and  Sunak is basking in the sunshine of yon AUKUS agreement which he signed with the Aussie PM and Biden at the past weekend. That’s also meant to make us all ‘feel safe’. You might like to have a quick glance at Caitlin Johnstone’s observations regarding that treaty. She writes that: “In reality, Australia is not arming itself against China to protect itself from China. Australia is arming itself against China to protect itself from the United States.” (link)

Meanwhile, the tremors presaging the coming economic earthquake are coming closer. After the crash of the Silicon Valley Bank which allegedly nobody was able to predict, not even their top manager, the next bank experiencing an earthquake is very much closer than California. It’s the Swiss bank ‘Credit Suisse’. Yesterday afternoon The Times reported:

“Credit Suisse will borrow up to 50 billion Swiss francs (£44.5 billion) from the country’s central bank in a bid to quell anxiety over its financial health. The Zurich-based lender said it was taking “decisive action to pre-emptively strengthen liquidity” in a statement issued in the early this morning. […] The bank said that exercising an option to borrow up to SwFr50 billion from the Swiss National Bank “would support Credit Suisse’s core businesses and clients as Credit Suisse takes the necessary steps to create a simpler and more focused bank built around client needs”.” (link, paywalled)

Note the reassuring weasel words, note that Credit Suisse aims to ‘create a simpler and more focus bank around client needs’. Don’t ask what that bank was focussed on before. Mind you, this optimistic announcement was made in the afternoon. It got worse in the evening. This morning, the DT had more news on this bank (this and other emphases are mine):

The Bank of England was holding emergency talks with international counterparts on Wednesday night after shares in Credit Suisse plunged as much as 30 per cent, spreading fear through the City of London that overshadowed Jeremy Hunt’s maiden Budget. […] Growing fears of a new banking crisis have led financial experts to begin reassessing forecasts for economic growth, with some predicting that central banks will soon have to start cutting interest rates.” (paywalled link)

With the Bank of England again involved, with ‘experts’ already saying that there might be a ‘bail-out’ for that bank – we remember who will pay for this, do  we not! – or talking about the bank being ‘too big to fail’, or about the necessary lowering of interest rates, there was only scant mention of why Credit Suisse was suddenly at the financial abyss, after their afternoon statement. Scrolling down nearly to the end, we’re told, in one bland sentence, that “Ammar Al Khudairy, chairman of the Saudi National Bank (SNB), said his company will not invest any more capital into Credit Suisse for regulatory reasons.” (paywalled link)

That decision, you will agree, begs quite a few questions. The German paper ‘Die Welt’ had a bit more to say (machine translated):

The major Swiss bank Credit Suisse exacerbated concerns about a new banking crisis on Wednesday. The trigger was an interview by Ammar Al Khudairy with the television Bloomberg TV. In it, the president of the Saudi National Bank stated that he was under no circumstances willing to put more money into the institute. Since a capital increase at the end of last year, the institute from the Gulf State is the largest shareholder of the second largest Swiss bank with a share of 9.9 percent. […] The reason for the crash is the realization that the Arabs are not ready as rescuers in need in case of doubt. “The Saudis have enough money,” said a high-ranking Swiss banker the day before. Now this option is officially excluded.” (paywalled link, in German)

Not even the German reporters asked why suddenly the Arabs aren’t willing to hand over more of their money. Some intrepid comment posters did point out that the Swiss breaking their famed neutrality by joining the sanctions against Russia last year might conceivably have had something to do with the Saudi’s unwillingness to hand over more of their money. After all, when even the financial safe haven of Swiss banking becomes the playball of US political ‘interests’, up to sanctions and freezing of assets, why would they, why should they? ’Russians today’ might easily become ‘Arabs tomorrow’, ‘Chinese next,’ at the drop of Uncle Sam’s hat. Why throw good money after bad …

That’s all I have for today. Truly, events have shown the truth of Kissinger’s quip: “To be an enemy of America can be dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal.”. Will Sunak even notice? Meanwhile the economic earthquake is coming ever closer. Have a good day.