Nigel is all over the front pages later and not just on FR!
I must thank the Mods who Front Paged the story here earlier for getting the word out.
Question is: Will anything be done?
All of Britain should be discussing this.
Nigel’s daughter also got her accounts shut down. That sounds like what Russia and North Korea do.
So a bank in the UK can refuse to do business with a customer who doesn’t align with their values, but a baker in Colorado must do business with with a customer who doesn’t align with his values?
Agree, this is a big deal. But there are two different issues in play.
1. Enterprise Risk in the financial sector generally. An overly litigious setup exists to the point where banks must indemnify themselves against existential fines if there’s a data breach, organised crime is laundering through the banking system, politically exposed persons are being bankrolled openly by rogue nations, and so on.
I’m going through a seriously adversarial bank process right now not because I’m a crook but because practically everybody working in my field now has to prove that they’re untouched by dodgy money and can’t easily be targeted by blackmailers.
And yet my inbox is full of things like, join this class action lawsuit against the banks because they overprofited from fees, sue the hospitals because of possible misdiagnosis, sue the city if you’ve tripped on a loose paving stone, sue the city over potholes...
This toxic adversarial litigious culture is an American import. “Caution, this hot coffee is hot” labels on coffee cups is inane but it’s there because people can sue if they’re not told.
2. ESG is an Enterprise Risk topic. So is Cyber Risk. So is Regulatory Risk. So is Compliance Risk. A bank that has a “zero risk appetite” for getting fined ends up penalising its customers and suppliers.
If you are super rich but can’t prove you’re not a liability THIS way, you’re a far bigger risk to the bank than if you’re a poor blue collar joe who’s getting into mortgage arrears.
Farage is really not the best example of a person getting unjustly hit. Brexit was funded by the Kremlin, Farage was a figurehead. The Kremlin institutionally backs dirty money and Kompromat. Every attempt to clean up Russian banking has been torpedoed from the very top.
Anyone who gets any pay from the Russian Deep State, has a large public profile, and campaigns for something that is specifically mentioned in the Dugin plan for Russia breaking the West, is an unacceptable Risk liability for the banks.
How do you think the bank can explain that without making specific allegations?
“Values” doesn’t necessarily mean they are attacking Farage because he backed Brexit or backed immigration control.
Far more likely is, their “values” include getting anyone who has too many “Enterprise Risk factors” off the books even if they’re multi millionaires, and Farage ticks way too many of those boxes.
bttt