I touched a raw nerve yesterday when I asked a panel of Britain's top business journalists whether the recession had set back the cause of businesses communicating with the media and the public.
In his reply, Daily Mail City editor Alex Brummer dripped venom on Britain's banks, describing how the head of a major retail bank angrily told him that his company wasn't in trouble. Just days later, it collapsed, leaving the veteran journalist doubting everything a bank chief or press officer said.
The event, organised by media and PR information firm Gorkana, was headlined, After the break - the communications challenges facing business for the rest of 2009. But as The Observer's business editor Ruth Sunderland pointed out, it's wrong to see the crisis as simply a communications challenge. We're seeing jobs being lost on a huge scale - and the British government has poured mind-boggling trillion pounds into the banking system. None of us knows if that huge gamble will work. But Alex Brummer starkly warned that if that safety net was pulled away, we'd have no banking system or economy left.
Brummer clashed with the BBC's chief economics correspondent Hugh Pym. Pym didn't share the view that the banks were solely responsible for the credit explosion. "We all benefited from cheap credit," said Hugh, responding to Alex's condemnation of the banks for creating an unsustainable consumer spending bubble. "We're all in this together, and it's too simple to blame the banks for everything that's gone wrong."
Despite his chilling words about the banks, Brummer acknowledged that bank chiefs such as HSBC chairman Stephen Green and Barclays chief executive John Varley have made a concerted effort to explain how their companies are navigating a course through the crisis. But he complained that Angela Knight, chief executive of the British Bankers Association, has all too often been a lone voice defending Britain's banks.
Alex and Hugh had differing views of the way banks had centralised lending decisions over the years. Alex recalled the days when local bank managers (like Dad's Army's Captain Mainwaring) had the authority to agree loans to local businesses. They knew which companies on their patch were in difficulties and which were doing well, helped banks and businesses alike. Now, decisions are taken miles away at regional or head offices. I pointed out that this was the world portrayed in the BBC's 1979 drama Telford's Change, in which a high flying bank executive turned his back on head office to become a branch manager again, to play a greater role in the community. Hugh remembered Peter Barkworth's series, but thought the idea of returning to the days of Captain Mainwaring-style banking was unthinkable.
The panelists poured scorn on Chancellor Alistair Darling's theatrical dressing down of banks chiefs over lending to British business. As Hugh Pym commented, it's absurd for the chancellor to tell banks who they should and should not lend to. The banks and government have conflicting objectives: to restore bank profitability, to return the part-nationalised banks to private ownership, to avoid a bad debt explosion - and to lend to business.
Finally, Ruth Sunderland condemned Britain's business and governing classes as 'pale, male and stale'. She questioned whether we'd be in this mess if the decision makers came from a more diverse background. It's hard to disagree: the overwhelming evidence is that the non executive directors of our failed banks shared the lemming like tendencies of disgraced executives such as Northern Rock's Adam Applegarth and RBS's Fred Goodwin. They were all caught up in a testosterone fuelled car wreck. Unfortunately, the rest of us are paying the colossal price of that male folly.
The Gorkana breakfast debate took place at Clifford Chance in Canary Wharf. It was chaired by Michael Wilson, business editor of Sky News.
Recent Comments