Why is the Treasury defending big bankers' bonuses?

 
City of London

One important cause of the great 2007-08 banking crisis was that bankers had been given incentives, in the form of enormous cash bonuses, to take dangerous risks to boost their firms' profits.

Which is why some will be shocked and even horrified that the Treasury has decided to challenge at the European Court new European Union rules that would limit bonuses for bankers to the equivalent of one year's salary - or two years' with shareholder approval.

But the Treasury insists that it is not defending the kind of rewards that did so much financial and economic harm.

It argues that the EU bonus ceiling would have the opposite effect to that intended, in that the cap is encouraging banks based in London to massively increase the fixed salaries of their top staff, to prevent these executives quitting the EU for financial centres where such pay controls don't exist.

There is evidence this inflation of bankers' salaries is already happening.

And when bankers can earn colossal sums come rain or shine, there is very little incentive for them to behave prudently and responsibly - as the chancellor has argued.

Also, most bonuses these days are paid in shares and cannot be pocketed for years after they have been awarded - so today's bonus system contains a disincentive to take the kind of risks that would blow up the banks.

There is of course another point, which the chancellor doesn't shout about. Which is that the vast majority of Europe's big bonus paying banks are based in London, rather than Paris, Frankfurt or Milan - and there was a risk that London's leadership as a global financial centre would be jeopardised by the enforced pay restraint.

In defending the interests of the City, the chancellor finds himself defending the very large rewards of bankers.

That he may not find wholly comfortable.

So for neutral observers of the latest scrap between Labour and the Tories, the timing of the announcement of the Treasury's bonus cap appeal is delicious.

Here is why.

The Tories have spent the past 24 hours pointing out the extent to which the Labour leader Ed Miliband has alienated leaders of big business, with his plans to reverse a cut in the corporation tax rate, to strip housebuilders of unused development and to prevent energy companies from increasing power prices.

Quite a number of bosses of big companies, even Labour-sympathising ones, tell me that they were made to feel profoundly uncomfortable by Mr Miliband's speech to his conference, because they felt he was characterising them as the enemy - in a return to the politics of industrial confrontation which they believed Tony Blair had ditched forever.

This froideur between the bosses and Labour's front bench has been delighting senior Tories.

But if history teaches that it is dangerous for Labour to make an enemy of big capital, it may not be astute popular politics for the Conservatives to be seen as the chum of financial capital, otherwise known as the bankers.

The effectiveness of the Tories' attack on Labour as the enemy of wealth creation may be blunted if they are seen as too close to a face of capitalism seen by many as unacceptable.

 
Robert Peston, economics editor Article written by Robert Peston Robert Peston Economics editor

Why Coe is set to win BBC race

Why Lord Coe is likely to be next chairman of the BBC Trust, but he may be its last chairman (at least of the Trust as currently configured).

Read full article

More on This Story

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 491.

    Cos the US tells it to. With the Single European Act and deregualtion of US/UK finance markets, the City became a tax haven for unregulated US banks. These seek to remove EU institutions and regulations which hinder competition and expansion. Since the crisis Germany/France want to take back eurozone control of financial services with regulation of hedge funds & banks. The UK Govt is trojan horse

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 490.

    Made a point thousands could do as good a job, was forgetting morals. These Bankers have a pathological inability to empathise with humanity; a fantastic blindness to 3,000 yrs of moral and philosophical development. Normal humans cannot do what they do. That is why there are special schools like Eton etc turning out the arrogant sociopaths who fill these unnecessary self-serving roles.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 489.

    488. David... when you say Calcutta, in which state is that?

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 488.

    Away from the bankers' suburbs, most of the UK is, at best, quaint and slummy. The banks are what drives UK prosperity (although mismanagement nearly destroyed the banks & the economy). Reform the banks, employ more intelligent people in them, but don't destroy them - unless you want London to look even more like Calcutta.

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 487.

    Why is Mr Osborne wasting his time flying to and from Brussels to try and protect the free for all bankers bonuses in this country? This is a sensible EU policy backed by every member state except for ... you guessed it - The UK.
    Why doesn't he for example spend his time getting a cap on energy prices?
    He's only doing this because of his Euro sceptic fringe in his party + UKIP. Get real Mr O.....

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 486.

    No banker makes any money at all, they merely steal it from the individuals who use the bank or the business they fleece with expensive loans.
    On the other hand although I hate bankers, their closed shop, their unjustified salaries and enormous bonuses it should be the UK government that regulates it.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 485.

    @484.nigel willis
    "A banker makes £100m for the bank, he gets a £2m bonus"

    No problem. The problem starts here:

    A banker loses £100m for the bank, he gets a £2m bonus, out of the £100m that we taxpayers gave the bank.

    Why would you defend the active promotion of failure?

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 484.

    A banker makes £100m for the bank, he gets a £2m bonus, how many hospitals can you build with the resulting income and corporation tax, banking levy, National Insurance and VAT? Why do bankers bother with London and Edinburgh etc? Was the crash entirely the bankers' fault when the phone thrower imposed a hopeless tripartite system of 'light touch' regulation with no-one in charge?

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 483.

    The only element that benefits a nation is intelligent industry producing goods required by a market. Banks should support this activity but are now parasitic. A pound is not enhanced in value by manipulation or risk proof? algorithms.
    When limited fractional reserve retail banking is separated from casino banking then bonuses can continue. No more bailouts. Penalties for excessive risk taking.

  • rate this
    +2

    Comment number 482.

    I don't suppose anyone at the Treasury used to be with Goldman Sachs by any chance ?

  • rate this
    -2

    Comment number 481.

    Robert, don't be too hard on the govt for defending the British financial services industry. Nowadays the UK is, economically, a one-horse town. Without the banks, there's little left - can mass prosperity be built on the UK's miserable manufacturing base & its tiny agricultural sector? So let's hold our noses & deal with the bankers - without them, the UK will be at India's economic level.

  • rate this
    +4

    Comment number 480.

    "Quite a number of bosses of big companies, even Labour-sympathising ones, tell me that they were made to feel profoundly uncomfortable by Mr Miliband's speech to his conference, because they felt he was characterising them as the enemy "

    You have stolen over £500 billion from us. You ARE the enemy.

  • rate this
    -1

    Comment number 479.

    montecristo5000 "These people have ZERO conscience" actually the Office of National Statistics found that they have TWO THOUSAND conscience. So get your facts straight please. No time for time wasters. Banking to be done

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 478.

    "98% of bankers do not do any sort of tax avoidance (probably)"

    based on what evidence, exactly? If anything 98% bankers DO use tax avoidance, if LIBOR, PPI mis selling, and misuse of Credit Default Swaps, etc, is anything to go by. These people have ZERO conscience.

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 477.

    "Quite a number of bosses of big companies, even Labour-sympathising ones, tell me that they were made to feel profoundly uncomfortable by Mr Miliband's speech to his conference, because they felt he was characterising them as the enemy "

    Tories & Media routinely demonise Unions - and there is never the slightest concern about that. Double standards.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 476.

    @Eatthegroundrunning That is so interesting and you know what I think it's mostly likely true. Maybe with so increase the tax on being a woman if they're avoiding tax, what do you think?

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 475.

    @ikr why can't people understand that we need to protect the banks and ensure that bankers are happy. It's not bankers or bonuses that are the issue, it is that people are not willing to give for them. 98% of bankers do not do any sort of tax avoidance (probably) I reckon that the number for women is a lot higher. Something to think about...

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 474.

    The issue isn't bankers bonuses or even its size. Rather the fact that we (the tax payer) rescued the banks to the tune of £100BN and there is no move to recover that.

    Bankers are the great socialists - they successfully socialised their losses. That is where the objections stem from..

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 473.

    Thank goodness the BBC has opened a comment opportunity on this pet subject rather than all the revelations at the BBC conference this week.

  • rate this
    -1

    Comment number 472.

    370.Omegon
    Giving the state of our country's fifnacial situation I wouldn't pee on George Osborne if he was on fire

    Nice - especially since it was the previous Labour government that spent all our money and left the present government to sort out the bill !
    Some people have short memories !

 

Page 1 of 25

 

Features

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.