Commission backs Lloyds as first privatisation

Lloyds sign

If George Osborne and Treasury agree with the Banking Commission's economic analysis, there is a clear implication for the two big semi-nationalised banks. A big chunk of Lloyds will be privatised before the next election, and no privatisation of the Royal Bank of Scotland will have taken place by then.

And, for what it's worth, a senior minister tells me he thinks that's the signal which will be sent out on Wednesday night by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his annual address to the City at the Mansion House.

"Privatisation of RBS is for the next parliament," said the minister.

So why would Lloyds be in the fast lane away from public ownership while RBS is stuck in the Treasury's service station?

Well, it is because there is a very lively debate, which the Banking Commission has stoked up, about whether RBS needs to be reconstructed.

As I mentioned earlier this month (Will the bad be taken out of RBS? and Commission waters down RBS break-up call), the commission is in favour of hiving off the bad bits of RBS.

RBS Its future is yet to be decided

The final report says that "there may be significant advantages" to "splitting RBS into a good bank and bad bank".

But the commission accepts that it didn't conduct forensic investigation of the costs and risks to taxpayers, whether it would help or hinder privatisation or whether there would be tricky state aid implications.

So it wants Treasury to properly investigate the pros and cons, and publish a detailed report on this for Parliament to scrutinise by September.

This Treasury report would also look at two other possible routes for reshaping RBS:

  1. the full separation of its investment bank, which some would see as the logical conclusion of the chancellor's pressure on RBS to shrink its investment bank and concentrate on UK retail banking
  2. the Archbishop of Canterbury's grand plan (the archbishop is an influential commission member) for the supposedly good bits of RBS to be privatised not as a single entity but broken up into small perhaps regional banks, to "support the emergence of a more diverse and competitive retail banking market".

Now, within the cabinet, there will be a lively debate about all this.

Vince Cable, the Business Secretary, believes that the current plan to shrink RBS's massive market share in small business banking - so-called Project Rainbow, which involves the sale of 315 branches - isn't ambitious enough.

He would like RBS obliged to sell off a rather bigger retail banking business to spur competition.

But his main priority for RBS is that it should be set new targets for providing credit to small businesses, and that the pay and rations of whoever fills the vacant position of RBS chief executive should be explicitly and strongly linked to hitting those targets.

What, however, is very striking about the commission's proposals is that there is very clear tension in them when it comes to RBS.

On the one hand, the commission urges radical measures that would postpone privatisation.

On the other, it says that RBS is "weighed down... by having the government as its main shareholder".

It complains of "political interference" in the banks, which it says has been worse at RBS than at Lloyds - and therefore says that privatising would be a good thing in and of itself.

That said, the commission wants any political interference to be more explicit and transparent - and therefore recommends the closure of UK Financial Investments, the agency charged with managing the Treasury's big shareholdings in Lloyds and RBS.

In a resonant passage, the commission says that "UKFI will increasingly be seen as a fig leaf to disguise the reality of direct government control".

This is particularly apt just days after the chancellor has been accused of bundling Stephen Hester out of the window and out of his seat as RBS chief executive.

In other words, the commission wants greater and more open political engagement with RBS in the short term, to facilitate its liberation and return to the private sector in the longer term.

As for Lloyds, the commission says "it appears better placed to return to the private sector without additional restructuring".

As it happens, the chancellor would agree - and will reveal more about how the privatisation of Lloyds will begin, perhaps even later this year, at the Mansion House on Wednesday night.

Robert Peston Article written by Robert Peston Robert Peston Economics editor

Living standards not quite back to peak

Living standards for a typical family are back to where they were before the recession, says the IFS, although not for those 30 and under.

Read full article

More on This Story

More from Robert


This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
  • rate this

    Comment number 99.

    If anyone owns 82% of a company they will want to have a say in how it's run. Why is that surprising?
    RBS grew too big and this is the only chance to do something about it. If the govt want competition in the banking sector then they must split RBS into good/bad, retail/investment and then break it up further within those categories. Or keep it in public ownership as a yardstick for competition.

  • rate this

    Comment number 98.

    I presume if Lloyds is to be split into 'good and 'bad' banks us poor saps who pay our taxes will get the 'bad' bit. The City spivs, and their friends will get the 'good' bit. Then run into trouble and we have to bail them out again, as they 'cannot fail'. Whilst they get huge bonuses, for such a failure.

  • rate this

    Comment number 97.

    "Those who persuaded (Lloyds)
    should answer for their actions"
    We allow ourselves hope in 'summit talks' without formality, but the problems we face reflect a fatally corrupted polity, no 'common-sense', no trust but in justified distrust, national as local our leaders accident-prone: Bush-Blair 're-making' ME, Brown inviting master-bankers to over-reach, caught out by 2010 electioneers

  • rate this

    Comment number 96.

    LloydsTSB had a track record of playing safe with its investments unlike the other banks.

    It only got into trouble as a result of being persuaded to take on the Halifax Bank.

    Those who persuaded it to do this should answer for their actions.

    OK LloydsTSB should have said NO to these persuaders.

  • rate this

    Comment number 95.

    Maybe the RBS floatation should be delayed until after Scotland's Independence Referendum.

    Which ain't that far off.


Comments 5 of 99


Features & Analysis

  • TricycleTreasure trove

    The lost property shop stuffed with diamonds, bikes... and a leg

  • Boris Nemtsov'I loved Nemtsov'

    A murder in an atmosphere of hatred and intolerance

  • Image of George from Tube CrushTube crush

    How London's male commuters set Chinese hearts racing

  • INDHUJA'Dorky tomboy'

    The Indian who attracted proposals through honesty

From BBC Capital


  • Kinetic sculpture violinClick Watch

    The "kinetic sculpture" that can replicate digital files and play them on a violin

Copyright © 2015 BBC. 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.