Funding is key
The Bracken column is named after Brendan Bracken, the founding editor of The Banker in 1926 and chairman of the modern-day Financial Times from 1945 to 1958.
There is a good deal of support for Jacques de Larosière’s February 2009 report on how to 'repair' the EU's financial supervisory and regulatory structures, balancing just enough centralisation with national safeguards to get widespread support. But he barely considers the key question of who will provide funds to tackle a banking crisis if the decisions to save or let a bank go affect more than one country. While funding is a domestic problem, it is also a domestic political tool to be shaped in line with national objectives, national priorities and national beneficiaries.
Strategic considerations at the G-20
The rhetoric was hot and the drama significant as the Group of 20 leaders gathered in London.
Creating liquidity risk transparency
Until recently, most banks seemed to believe that, in relation to the disclosure of liquidity risk, less disclosure was 'more prudent' and more knowledge was a dangerous thing. Since 2008, not only has liquidity risk become a stakeholder issue but it has also absorbed many more stakeholders. Traditionally, the stakeholders who had a direct interest in liquidity risk were the asset and liability committee and the local regulator. Stakeholders now include holders of senior and subordinated debt, wholesale and retail depositors and shareholders. More significantly, shareholders not only include private investors but also sovereign states.
Guarantees: a double-edged sword
As the search goes on for culprits and remedies in the global financial crisis, not enough attention has focused on the role played by governments in explicitly or implicitly guaranteeing the banking system.



