If the media was to be believed, the fact that there are people without access to bank accounts in the UK has only just been discovered. Nothing could be further from the truth. The issue is real and ongoing. Let's have some facts. A thread....
The Financial Conduct Authority (the FCA) has responsibility for monitoring this issue. It issued a report on it earlier this year. The data in this thread all comes from there. fca.org.uk/publications/f…
The number of unbanked adults in recent years was as follows:
Around one in fifty adults are unbanked.
The demographic looks like this:
As ever, it seems to be the young who lose out: it is also especially hard for them to be unbanked, I suspect.
The demographics of those unbanked are further explained as follows:
As the FCA also notes:
"There were higher proportions of unbanked adults in Southern Scotland (6%), Outer London – West and North West (5%), Greater Manchester (4%), and the West Midlands (4%)."
They add:
"There is also a strong link to deprivation, as 3.6% of adults in the most deprived areas of the UK are unbanked, compared with less than 0.6% in the least deprived areas."
So, let's be clear that the problem of being unbanked does not mainly arise from having a bank account closed: it arises because a bank account is not available.
This, however, is not seen as a problem for all those without bank accounts. As the FCA notes:
One-quarter of the unbanked might not want a bank account. About a fifth do. The rest would like the option. What is apparent is that people aren't aware that large banks are legally obliged to offer basic bank accounts. These do not allow overdrafts but do provide payment cards:
It would seem that very little effort is being made to make people aware of this service.
Around 15% of all applications for financial services products are refused, according to the FCA. Those being refused have the following profile, with all the usual prejudices in society obviously present:
Credit facilities were by far the most likely product to be refused:
However, bank accounts were also refused:
A staggering 16% of those who applied for a basic bank account were refused, double the rate for routine accounts.
There were reasons for rejection, of course:
It would appear that potential political bias by the organisation to which the application was made is a very limited issue.
There were much stronger reasons why people felt unbanked. One was because some (mainly older) people have a dependence on branch banking:
Too many of these people are being unbanked by the closure of their branches:
There is also a massive problem with exclusion as a result of banks relying on digital access:
There is also a barrier to data on banking for the same reason:
So, what to suggest?
I think that there are three vital issues to note.
The first is that if access to banking is now a social necessity (and I think it is), then the current situation of those unbanked is unacceptable.
Second, it is apparent that the current behaviour of commercial banks is not addressing this issue. Their focus on supposed efficiency is achieved at a considerable cost to many of their customers, many of whom might be considered the more vulnerable.
Third, when 16% of applications for basic bank accounts are being refused there is no safety net being provided.
In that case there is a need for real reform and this can only come from a state bank that:
• Guarantees basic bank accounts
• Has a wide High Street presence
• Is focussed on providing financial assistance
• Has the goal of achieving inclusion.
Which party will offer this?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I cannot be alone in being bored by hearing and seeing Nigel Farage in the media talking about the future of banking as if it was all about him, when that is anything but true. A thread...
I also do not much care that Nat West decided to close his bank accounts. I do not think this was woke capitalism. I think it was the result of perceived risk, ineptly appraised. That is a minor issue.
That said, the boss of Nat West was straightforwardly wrong to brief the BBC on his affairs. Bankers do not have that right.
I tried posting a thread this morning on what I think to be the massive errors made by the Office for Budget Responsibility when forecasting the UK's economic future. Tne boosting went wrong, so here it is in a different way...
The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) issued a report this week saying the UK's national debt is out of control. It forecasts it will grow to maybe 300% of GDP by 2070. But there were massive errors in the report and a lot of handwringing and no solutions. So, a thread....
If the OBR is to be believed, the UK is heading for economic hell. It isn't. It may be heading for climate hell, but assuming we address that issue, economic hell is not on the agenda.
This thread is in three parts. The first is about what the OBR got wrong. The second is about what they could have said about the state we're in. And the third is what they should be saying about the future. All of them suggest that the report was seriously deficient.
Rishi Sunk has said that this year's public sector pay awards have been agreed in full but with no new or additional funding to cover them. There is literally no economic sense in this whatsoever. A short thread...
Pay rises of around 6% for education and healthy have been announced - with there being no room for discussion, apparently, whatsoever. In other words, the government has, by decree, just announced real pay cuts for millions of people.
This makes no sense. It guarantees three things. The first is more people leaving the public sector. They will quite simply not be able to afford to stay. So already massively depleted services will be undermined even further.
There is a way out of the economic mess the UK is in. It only requires two things. The first is knowledge. The second is an admission of past mistakes. That’s it, in a nutshell. A thread…..
Everyone but government ministers admit that we are in a mess, and they’re just lying. It is, in that case, a universal truth worth acknowledging that we are in need of a solution to our problems.
It is also true, as Einstein once noted, that doing the same failed thing over and over again and hoping for a different outcome next time, as our politicians seem to be doing, is the closest thing to a working definition of insanity as we’re likely to get.
The government and the Bank of England are again calling today for wage restraint to beat inflation - as if the whole cost of beating inflation must fall on wage-earning households and not the companies and banks that are causing it or the wealthy who are gaining. A thread....
As I have said time and again, wage rises cannot be causing our inflation. Wage rises have been persistently lower than the rate of inflation throughout the period since Covid and so there is no basis whatsoever for saying wage rises are causing inflation.
If the Governor of the Bank of England and the government want to crack down on inflation they need to cut interest rates as they are pushing up prices. They also need to end profiteering. And they need to tax those who have gained - the wealthy and the banks - more.