Outlook: Mutuality doesn't have to be a hard place for Rock

David Prosser
Thursday 04 August 2011 10:00 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

In the wake of the credit crisis, it is rather too easy to fall into the trap of judging banks bad and building societies good. While the mutual sector had a relatively good war – particularly compared with the former mutuals that blew up during the crisis – the buildingsociety movement was not without its own casualties.

Still, it is a matter of regret that it now seems highly unlikely the process of returning Northern Rock, or at least the "good" part of it, to the private sector will see it regain the mutual status given up in 1997. The inside word from the sales team is that none of the mooted building society bidders has followed through on their interest. Nor does the Chancellor seem to be considering anything other than a straight sale.

One can understand the political expediency of making a start with returning rescued banks to the private sector. The desirability of getting these assets off taxpayers' books is part economic – we need the cash – and part ideological – the state should not be in the banking business. Plus, the sales will finally begin to bring some closure to the credit-crunch saga.

That's not to say, however, that we should simply take the easiest and quickest option with Northern Rock.

It's not as if taxpayers are poised to make a handsome return on the bank – quite the reverse, in fact, since it is now likely to be sold at a £300m-£400m loss. In time, we will probably still make a return on the saving of Northern Rock, since the "bad" part of the bank, which is remaining with the state, looks likely to recoup those losses and more.

But if we are prepared to be patient in waiting for a return on our money, why not take a little more time to explore other options for the current sale process?

After all, selling Northern Rock to an existing building society is not the only way to remutualise it – just a way to do so while getting cash for it up front. Supporters of the sector, such as the Mutuo group, have published feasible models for returning Northern Rock to customer ownership while paying back the taxpayer its investment over time. These models might even produce a greater eventual return.

The previous government's post-banking crisis white paper contained an explicit commitment to boosting mutually-owned financial-services companies, while the current administration has made similar pledges (and not just in finance – consider the big society).

Moreover, having asked the Independent Commission on Banking to look into improving competition in the banking sector, one would have expected the Treasury to seize every opportunity to promote a diverse range of business structures. Northern Rock is the ideal place to start.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in