Jeremy Hunt’s City deregulation plans are ‘dangerous’ mistake, warns expert https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/dec/09/jeremy-hunt-sets-out-sweeping-reforms-to-financial-sector Sir John Vickers, architect of post-2008 banking reforms, says plans put UK financial stability at risk The ‘Edinburgh reforms’ range from plans to consult on a new central bank digital currency to changing tax rules for investment trusts. Kalyeena Makortoff Banking correspondent @kalyeena Fri 9 Dec 2022 The chancellor is making a great mistake and may be taking the UK down an “extremely dangerous and wrong path” by repealing City regulations meant to avoid another financial crisis, a key architect of post-crash banking reforms has warned. Sir John Vickers, a senior economist who led the independent commission reviewing the UK banking industry after the 2007-08 crisis, said key elements of a deregulation package unveiled by Jeremy Hunt on Friday could put Britain’s financial stability at risk. Vickers said he was particularly concerned about plans to roll back ringfencing rules that George Osborne introduced as chancellor after the crash, and were intended to protect everyday customers by separating their deposits from riskier investment banking operations. Those rules, which only came into force in 2019, were the “bedrock of how we regulate banks in the UK”, Vickers said. “If they’re saying: ‘Look, we’re 10 years on, we could make some adjustments, but it remains part of the bedrock,’ then I would say: ‘Fine’. If, on the other hand, they’re saying: ‘Maybe it’s time to roll back on this,” then I think that would be an extremely dangerous and wrong path for us to follow,” he told the Guardian. The changes to the ringfencing rules, which will go to consultation in 2023, could take years to implement, but could free a number of smaller banks – including TSB, Santander UK and Virgin Money – from having to follow the regulations. However, they could also result in larger banks such as NatWest and Lloyds facing fewer restrictions on how they fund their operations, and allow them to sell more complex products to customers within their ringfenced bank. Hunt’s deregulation plans, called the “Edinburgh reforms” after being launched in the Scottish capital on Friday, will also prompt consultations about the senior managers regime that holds bosses personally and financially responsible for problems that occur on their watch. The package, which includes more than 30 changes, also includes plans for a central bank digital currency and changes to the rules on short-selling – where investors bet that the price of an asset will drop. That is on top of introducing new targets for City regulators that will force them to consider how their rules could increase competition and UK growth, including by boosting venture capital funding for growing companies; unlocking funding for infrastructure projects; and helping first-time buyers access the housing market. But Vickers, who previously sat on the Bank of England’s interest rate-setting monetary policy committee, said it was a mistake to give banks and insurers special treatment by rowing back on such a wide range of regulations, even in the name of growth. “We want safe and sound institutions we want well-functioning financial markets,” Vickers said. “What I think would be a great mistake would be to put the financial services sector on some kind of pedestal, warranting kind of special light touch regulatory treatment, when we all need that sector to be safe and sound for the competitiveness of the economy as a whole. “So I’m sure there are lots of good competitiveness, and productivity reforms, but let us think in a ‘whole economy’ way, not with undue concentration and focus on this sector, important though it is.” However, Hunt defended the plans on Friday, telling a Financial Times conference his package of changes would not increase risk across the financial sector. “This is a very considered and balanced package. I mean, we have to make sure that we don’t unlearn the lessons of 2008. But at the same time, recognise that banks today have much stronger balance sheets, [and] we have a much more developed resolution system if things do go wrong.” “And in that context, it is perfectly sensible to make pragmatic changes such as the ones that we’re announcing today. But we’re doing so very, very carefully to make sure that the UK is competitive, exciting, the place to be the place to invest, but also that we don’t lose the guardrails that were put in place after 2008,” he added. ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTUlz6Y4T3g

How and why is Israel trying to downplay havoc wreaked by Iranian missiles https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2024/04/17/723856/how-why-israel-downplaying-havoc-wreaked-iranian-missiles What does the available evidence suggest? The Iranian military operation, which came two weeks after the consulate attack, was not shrouded in secrecy. It was announced days before by political and military officials, and the United States was reportedly also informed about the day of the attack through diplomatic channels, 72 hours earlier. Besides, all leading Iranian media outlets, including Press TV, reported that Iran launched a barrage of drones at the occupied territories hours before they reached their intended target. Iranian military sources at first did not announce the precise types and quantity of weapons launched, mostly stating that they were "dozens" of drones and missiles. One local news agency published information about 500 drones launched during the attack, although not referring to domestic military sources but to a foreign news network. This claim was pleasurable at the time and served the purpose of causing panic as it sent millions of Israeli settlers and regime officials into underground shelters and safe houses. Later, the IRGC released three pieces of footage showing the launch of at least 20 ballistic missiles, 20 cruise missiles and a dozen drones. Private footage recorded in Iraq showed only a single drone and a cruise missile, so there was no independent visual evidence of initially reported huge ballistic volleys or drone swarms. Despite Israeli attempts at censorship, leaked footage from the occupied territories showed numerous powerful explosions of heavy warheads, apparently caused by Iranian quasi-ballistic or hypersonic missiles. Only in the case of one air base in the Negev, either Nevatim or Ramon, at least four films from different angles showed that at least five Iranian missiles smashed the intended target within 11 seconds. Satellite images of two large air bases established that the missiles were not fired randomly, but buildings and infrastructure were hit with pinpoint accuracy. An informed source told Press TV that the occupied territories were targeted with hypersonic missiles and that none was intercepted, without specifying whether it was the newly unveiled Fattah missile. Other Iranian media outlets reported that the weapon in question was actually the Kheibar Shekan, a maneuverable missile that has a hypersonic final stage. Major General Mohammad Baqeri, the chief of staff of the Iranian armed forces, said Iran hit a large Israeli intelligence base and Nevatim Airbase in the occupied lands, adding that the strikes "reached its goals" as the regime's air defense failed to engage it properly. What makes claim of Israeli regime and media ludicrous? Israel's claims of extremely successful interception of drones and missiles are debunked by verified numbers, contradictory official reports, attempts of censorship, falsification of evidence, various other manipulations, and the regime's furious reactions. First of all, the claims of 300-350 enemy targets and 99 percent downing, including all drones and cruise missiles, imply that three ballistic missiles hit the intended targets, which is untrue as at least nine such successful hits have been verified. The true extent of the damage cannot be determined because the Israeli regime has made enormous efforts to censor private footage and photos, openly threatening settlers not to post them online. Although they initially claimed that not a single hostile drone or cruise missile had reached the occupied territories, later the regime's media in Hebrew acknowledged the damage caused by drones in the vicinity of the Hermon Base. There were also serious reports from neighboring countries that the sites on the Golan Heights were severely hit, presumably by low-flying drones and cruise missiles, since there were no ballistic traces in the sky. The very purpose of the drones was not to cause significant damage, but to arrive at the target in coordination with salvos of cruise and ballistic missiles and then, together with hostile interceptor jets and missiles, overload the enemy radars. There is nothing to support the Israeli figures of "hundreds" of enemy targets, as there are no Iranian statements or independent confirmations, only Iranian footage of 50 different launches and Israeli footage of a handful being shot down. Israeli long-range anti-ballistic systems such as Arrow and David's Sling operate at a range of tens or hundreds of kilometers and very high altitudes. In other words, above Jordan, Syria and Iraq. If Israel's claims of 120 ballistic missiles and 99 percent interceptions were true, there should have been more than a hundred widely visible intercept explosion traces over the skies of those three countries, but not a single one was recorded.... ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1131CKdTwfw