Via – Make the bankers personally liable for risks they take, Stephen Pollard backs my bill to make bankers responsible for their own actions:

This isn’t capitalism – it is taxpayer-guaranteed gambling. It is basic human nature that only when people are held responsible for their actions do they act responsibly.

The flawed behaviour of those behind this latest scandal – the greed, the lying and the warped idea of entrepreneurialism – is hardly new. A working banking system should be able to cope with, and reject, such behaviour – not reward it.

The central problem with banks has been that employees are truly irresponsible. The consequences go only one way.

Stephen finishes with an endorsement of my proposed Bill.


  1. You just taken 20K off the median worker earning 26K a year. [1]

    Are you going to make yourself liable for that?

    [1] Two years increase in the state pension age is 2 years off the payments. At 5.4K a year that is 10.8K. In addition you are now going to force them to contribute another two years in NI contributions for nothing. Total close to 20K.

    That’s what comes when you operate a Ponzi fraud. Take money from people and give it to others.

    There is more evidence.

    1. The state pension liabilities doesn’t appear on the government books as with all the other unfunded liabilities

    2. MPs are aware of this, so made sure their pension scheme was fully funded. Even to the extent when there was a short fall they just helped themselves to more tax payers money.

    3. You’ve exempted your expenses from investigation by the Tax man. A perk to hide the expenses fraud.

    4. MPs protected themselves from prosecution. Why hasn’t a single MP who signed a expenses form saying the money was wholly necessary for their job and subsequently gave money back (none paying any interest) because that was a lie been prosecuted? The answer, the majority (over 50%) of MPs were committing the fraud.

    5. Why have MPs exempted themselves from Money Laundering regulations? What have they to hide?

    • My views on the true state of the nation’s liabilities are in Hansard and on this site.

      All the while I have been elected, the pay, pensions and expenses of MPs have been IPSA’s responsibility. IPSA are independent under law. I pay 13.75% pension contributions. My expenses are extremely dull indeed.

      If you wish to make the allegation on point 3, provide a reference.

      At the time of the MPs expenses scandal, I was as angry as anyone else. It was before my time and the system is now very different indeed.

      The money laundering exemption was a Telegraph scare which was conclusively debunked. I complained about it myself on ConHome and received a phone call and a written explanation from a minister. I was angry with the Telegraph and with the Government for making the scare possible.

      Of course the fact that politicians are spending other people’s money is one of the reasons that they should be constitutionally constrained.