Following the recent controversy about the closure of a bank account of former UKIP leader Nigel Farage (he is said to have banked at Coutts, although he did not identify that lender by name in his own story), more information about what might have caused this decision is coming out. Dominic Lawson, son of the late UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, Nigel Lawson (the TV cooking writer and literary editor Nigella Lawson is Dominic’s sister), has been through a similar process in the case of his daughter, who has Down’s Syndrome:
In 2016 we decided to open a bank account for her. She has Down’s Syndrome; this was not something she could do herself. But when my wife Rosa went to the Barclays in our nearest town (where Rosa had had an account for many years), she was told it would not be possible for Domenica to have an account. No reason was given. Fortunately Rosa knew the manager there — the position now no longer exists, and the branch itself is about to close — and he said that he would look into the matter.
He came back to Rosa: ‘I’m really sorry, but it’s out of our hands. It’s because of money-laundering risks. ‘I know this sounds ridiculous, but it’s because of Domenica’s grandfather. He is a politically exposed person.’ This was a reference to Nigel Lawson, my late father, the former chancellor, who was by then a member of the House of Lords. And as the Lords is a legislative assembly, that counted under the regulations. As, absurdly, did his granddaughter, who was of course oblivious to the bank’s implication that she might be a link to money laundering, or the funding of an international drugs cartel.
A friend of mine, known to several who write for and manage this blog, is a member of the House of Lords. I know several, in fact. Maybe they should phone their banks.
Eventually, we did manage to open an account for Domenica there, but it involved the most exhaustive form-filling, with much toing and froing between us and Barclays’ compliance people in London.
It seems that this insanity has struck sufficiently close to home that the UK government, usually a model of inanity and uselessness, is getting involved. After all, the Tories know they might be out of office soon, and might not want to go through what Mr Farage, the Lawsons, and several others have been through.
As I said in a comment on Patrick Crozier’s article about the “de-banking” of Mr Farage last week, this also demonstrates the danger of what are called central bank digital currencies. The potential for governments, such as those admiring the “social credit” regime of Communist China, to use CBDCs to enforce “correct” behaviours and suppress “bad” ones, such as blocking payments for alcohol, or closing contributions to unpopular causes, are dangerously large. Consider what the Canadian government of Justin Trudeau did to those financially supporting the anti-vaccine truckers, for example.
This other Samizdata article referred to HSBC. The Dominic Lawson article also refers to that bank in an unflattering way.
As an aside, what the current situation demonstrates is the lack of real choice in the banking system as it now operates. Linked to central banks for their funding, with CBs as “lenders of last resort”, and anti-money laundering laws imposed by force, bankers are no longer able to have confidential conversations with a client. A banker is obliged by law in most major industrialised nations to report on transactions they deem suspicious, for example, for whatever reason, and woe betide the banker that doesn’t. There are requirements such as Suspicious Transaction & Order Reports in the UK. The US Securities and Exchange Commission operates a similar process. In Switzerland, once renowned for its bank secrecy, non-domestic Swiss clients are no longer under its protection.
Politicians and their cheerleaders might applaud the “ghosting” or “de-banking” of people they dislike, but they ought to be aware that these powers cut both ways. Imagine if, for example, protest groups were to be designated as “terrorist” or whatever. Imagine if Just Stop Oil, Extinction Rebellion, or some other group, gets this treatment.
The bank can hide behind excuses like that but until I see them refusing service to the families of western left-liberal PEPs with ties to dubious regimes (Tony Blair and Hunter Biden spring to mind as examples) I’m gonna say it’s BS and more likely the banks are merely showing their own left-liberal inclinations.
The bank can hide behind excuses like that but until I see them refusing service to the families of western left-liberal PEPs with ties to dubious regimes (Tony Blair and Hunter Biden spring to mind as examples) I’m gonna say it’s BS and more likely the banks are merely showing their own left-liberal inclinations.
Quite. Tony Blair has made a bloody fortune advising various regimes. As far as I know his bank account or accounts are fine.
In the past of course I recall the likes of Mark Thatcher getting into all kinds of trouble.
The “wokerati” may be enjoying Farage’s situation, but it shows how dumb they are, because things can change politically, but the weapons used are the same. Remember, Nixon used to joke about auditing his enemies.
Imagine if, for example, protest groups were to be designated as “terrorist” or whatever. Imagine if Just Stop Oil, Extinction Rebellion, or some other group, gets this treatment.
As the Great Paul Marks has pointed out – that’s the equivalent, for me, of saying in discussing events in Pyongyang:
Imagine if, for example, The North Korean Workers Party were to be designated as “terrorist” or whatever. Imagine if Party members, Functionaries, or some other group, gets this treatment.
It’s not going to happen. The extreme left controls all the levers of power and the civil service alongside the judiciary and the education system. It’s tentacles spread everywhere so in effect they have total control, well beyond that being exercised in a country like North Korea. There’s no way groups like JSO or ER would ever fall foul of the powers that be.
Van_Patten: It’s not going to happen. The extreme left controls all the levers of power and the civil service alongside the judiciary and the education system.
You state that with the certainty of someone describing Newtonian mechanics. But….that is too easy. I can quite easily see politics shifting suddenly and alarmingly to the Right, such as with the rise of Christian nationalism in parts of the US and whatever in the continent. Whenever people say “X or Y is not going to happen”, I get queasy. The US Founding Fathers were smart enough (and as its almost July 4, worth bearing in mind) how oppressive tools that are wielded by the supposedly virtuous can boomerang.
I know a lot of those who opposed vaccine passports, for instance, who are on the centre-left in many other respects. They got radicalised. They “woke” up.
Yes this has been happening for a long time.
People who, rightly, complain about what was done to Nigel Lawson (the last Chancellor to really cut taxes – yes they have not been really cut since the mid 1980s) and Nigel Farage, should remember what was done to “Tommy Robinson” (if anyone really thinks he was not sent to prison for his opinions, but rather for XYZ – then I have a nice bridge to sell you) and to Katie Hopkins – Katie Hopkins was not sent to prison, but like any other other people, the lady lost her job, her bank account, her home, even her children.
Yes – even her children, they now have to live under different names.
Once the principle is conceded that expressing certain opinions makes it O.K. to persecute someone – then all is lost.
If anyone is not prepared to stand up for the Freedom of Speech of “Tommy Robinson” and Katie Hopkins because they are “spreaders of hate” – then they themselves deserve no help when the establishment comes for them, which it will.
I was glad to see Lawrence Fox making this point.
By the way – GB News has a ban on both “Tommy Robinson” and Katie Hopkins.
Katie Hopkins is on borrowed time from a brain tumour – but they ban her anyway. Mark Steyn almost died from a heart attack – and the response of the management of G.B. News was to stab him in the back – in order the please the totalitarians who are “Ofcom”.
And G.B. News is not the worst television station in the United Kingdom – it is the least bad. All the other stations are vastly worse.
And of course….
The “anti money laundering regulations” are just an excuse.
No one really thinks that Katie Hopkins and all the others are really running drug money for Mexican cartels.
These people are being persecuted for their opinions – persecuted by a systematically corrupt economic and governance system.
As for Racist Christian Nationalism.
Let us call it by its real name – the FBI.
The FBI, and other government agencies, create these groups in order to discredit dissent. The term is “False Flag” groups – and it was an old NKVD tactic. That the modern FBI models itself on the Soviet NKVD should, sadly, shock no one at this point.
They are as straight as people, in masks, turning up at the Capital Building on January 6th 2021 to smash windows – turning up there whilst President Trump was-still-speaking (about a mile away).
FED-FED-FED.
As honest as the 2020 election in many States – or the 2022 election for that matter.
Johnathan Pearce, rightly, talks of the Founding Fathers.
The Founding Fathers were clear that the “Police Power” belonged to the States – not the Federal Government.
So the FBI and the rest of these agencies should-not-exist.
Van_Patten is correct – the Western establishment and the left are, basically, one-and-the-same- that is what the leftist domination of the education system (the schools and universities) has led to. Including “free market” governments such as that of the Netherlands – which is busy crushing liberty.
They may NOT be strictly Marxists, they may prefer Henri Saint-Simon and Technocracy (or some other thing), but the “bottom lone” is that they are Collectivists.
They want to crush liberty – both of individuals and of nations.
International, world, Collectivist governance (governance – NOT formal world government) is what they are about. What they call “public-private partnership” or “Stakeholder Capitalism”. Especially its “cultural aspect” – everything from controlling what books appear in the book shops, to what films and television entertainment shows are produced.
And “they” includes the banks and major corporations – which are dependent on the drip feed of Credit Money and have been for a long time.
Can anyone explain how ‘ a politically exposed person.’ is related to money laundering and how it happens only to some politicians and not others.
I found strange that the this post show a lack of curiosity about the bank argument.
So did this happened to every chancellor? And if not why not? And if so why only Lawson?
I hope so.
lucklucky
Many people who have been “debanked” are not politicians at all – they are just ordinary people with the “wrong” opinions.
“But the banks say it is just because of the regulations on politically exposed persons”.
They are LYING.
The other corporations are lying as well.
That is what they do – they lie, and they cheat, and then they demand bailouts (open or hidden).
As for groups of Trust Fund kids, financed by some of the richest individuals and organisations on the planet, getting debanked.
Well I would not hold my breath waiting for that – I suspect the Tristrams and Gwendolines are not going to find themselves without a personal bank account.
Why Dominic Lawson family had this bankcensorship but we don’t have similar news about from other chancelllors?
Sidenote: i also find the lack of curiosity by the British media and other commenters about bank identity that attacked Farage civil rights puzzling.
Why Dominic Lawson family had this bankcensorship but we don’t have similar news from other chancelllors?
Sidenote: i also find the lack of curiosity by the British media and other commenters about bank identity that attacked Farage civil rights puzzling.
Just watching a “debate” on GB News – between some person who thinks “the regulations have gone too far” (he clearly does not understand the evil of the governmental and corporate establishment), and a lying leftist – who is lying (as lying leftists do).
I have now put the sound down – I can not take any more of this.
lucklucky – “why was Nigel Lawson hit but not other former Chancellors” or words to that effect, you must know why.
Because this is about OPINIONS.
And it is not one bank – for example Mr Farage has been to nine banks.
This is not really about “Politically Exposed Persons” regulations – that is just an excuse.
This is an effort by the international Corporate State to crush dissent – whether on mass migration and “Diversity”, “Net Zero”, or anything else.
Many ordinary people have been “de banked” for their OPINIONS.
lucklucky – please (please) stop asking the same questions over and over again – when you have already been told the answer.
“What is 1+1?”
2.
“What is 1+1?”
2.
“But what is 1+1?”
2 – blinking 2, stop asking the same question without listening to the answer.
What is DEI (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion – in Britain EDI, Equality, Diversity and Inclusion) and ESG (Environmental and Social Governance) about?
It is about promoting such things as “Diversity” (including “Trans Rights” for eight year children – Mr Biden and co were clear on that point in 2020, it was almost the only thing they were clear on) and Net Zero.
“But what about people who are against Diversity and Net Zero?” – they are to be persecuted and destroyed.
This has been growing for a long time – for example Agenda 21 (now Agenda 2030 – or just United Nations Sustainable Development goals) goes back to 1991 – to the time of, for example, President George Herbert Walker Bush and Prime Minister John Major.
The international Corporate State forces, government and corporations, are quite clear about their objectives – it is all out in the open, there is no “conspiracy”.
And, obviously, people who oppose these objectives are to be persecuted and destroyed.
There is nothing difficult to understand here – nothing complicated.
“But how did the international corporate state forces get so powerful – how did they get into a position where they could persecute and destroy dissenters”.
Because of tax law (which favours corporations against individuals – and favours corporate shareholders, against individual share owners), and fiat money – the Credit Bubble banking system.
That is how the corporate state forces got so powerful – that is how they got into a position where they could (for example) persecute and destroy people who are against “Diversity” and “Net Zero”.
I may have explained this a few times, or a few hundred times, before.
LuckyLucky: You write about the “strange lack of curiosity”. Well, I wrote a long post about this issue, refer to lots of the moving parts of it. I can guess why some other parts of the media are incurious – far too many journalists ingest the dominant “metacontext” that what the world needs is a bigger State, more rules, more laws to stop people saying “offensive” things, the whole usual mess.
I am, by the way, someone who works close to the wealth management industry of which Coutts (the bank widely thought to be the one that shut Farage’s account) is a prominent UK example. I can tell you from my sources that this is causing a LOT of waves, politically.
A politically exposed person is an important concept to get hold of because it is now baked into the IT and compliance systems of financial services today. It is usually defined as “someone who has been appointed by a community institution, an international body or a state (including the UK) to a high-profile position within the last 12 months.” (Source: The Law Society, UK). A PEP is not necessarily suspected of being a crook. It may be that such persons are deemed more at risk of having conflicts of interests. That’s why in the private banking sector, Know-Your-Client (KYC) checks are conducted by firms to screen for clients. If a client is a PEP, then additional compliance issues arise before such a person can have an account. It is a major “on-boarding” challenge in the sector and a reason why, for example, banks may require weeks or months to onboard people. The richer a person is, the more complex their holdings and assets, the longer it often takes.
As for why the family of the late Nigel Lawson was targeted, I imagine it is because he was alive at the time when Dominic Lawson explored an account for his daughter, while a number of other chancellors with families of adult age are dead. There may be just random nonsense going on – D. Lawson was unlucky. Another factor might have been that the late Lord Lawson was a high-profile sceptic of man-made catastrophic global warming theories, and banks these days are desperate to trumpet their “Green” credentials. But I put this more down to the sheer cussedness and stupidity of the rules, rather like those that TSA in the US might apply to people trying to get on a plane. I think what happened to D Lawson is an outrage. That’s why, hopefully, rules are going to change.
Maybe the family of George Osborne (former Chancellor in the David Cameron period 2010-2016) could have an issue: Osborne has a few Russian connections, or at least he did in the past.
I wonder how former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroder, who was knee-deep in Russian money, gets on these days when he wants a bank account.
There is obviously a fair degree of hypocrisy and double-standards going on. Lawson rocked boats (he was a brilliant and incisive critic of the EU, a Thatcherite chancellor who was a big hitter in the 80s, and an AGW sceptic). Schroder was a centre-left politician, and Osborne was a Cameroonian ally. But they could be targeted.
The problem is that PEP rules are also dangerously vague. When it comes to current/former politicians, civil servants, NGO bosses, etc, the focus should be on what they disclose to the public domain as part of their jobs. It isn’t and shouldn’t be the job of banks to do the job that elected officials and voters aren’t able or willing to do.
Wasn’t there a scandal just over twelve months ago about the Indian company Sunak’s father-in-law owns having business ties with Russia? Yet apparently Farage is the one who’s funded by Russia
I think it highly unlikely Farage is funded by Russia. His inability to see why confronting Russia is clearly in the UK’s geopolitical interests means I no longer trust or rate him, but I put that down to ignorance & parochialism rather than being on the payroll.
Coutts. Hardly a secret.
No Mr Farage is not “funded by Russia” – and many people have been “debanked” without anyone claiming that they are funded by Russia.
Nor is the media lacking in curiosity – for example that people are being persecuted for their opinions was all over the Daily Mail (one of the biggest selling newspapers in Britain).
What luck-lucky (and many others) fail to grasp is that there is no secret as to the agenda. The international agenda of government agencies, banks and corporations (the general Corporate State).
The agenda is that people who oppose “Diversity” and/or oppose “New Zero” are to be persecuted and destroyed.
The young, and not so young now, are being taught that it is perfectly fine (indeed morally good) to persecute and destroy such dissenters.
Yesterday I happened to look at the “New Scientist” magazine – there was very little science in it, but a lot absurd propaganda about “equality” (including in ancient history) and “climate”.
It would be easy to laugh at the absurd lies that made up most of the magazine – if it were not the case that the international agenda clearly is to persecute and destroy anyone who opposes this “Progressive” propaganda.
A few days ago I talked with a person, who described himself as an “historian” and a “life long Conservative”, this person informed me that Jacob Rees-Mogg, Suella Braverman and Kemi Badenock were “Fascists”, “like Oswald Mosely”.
I am sure that the leftists in whatever school or university this “historian” teaches are happy to have this “life long Conservative” in their establishment – so he can “balance” what they say, by pushing the-same-lies.
That Sir Oswald Mosely was actually to the left of the Labour Party (which he left in 1931) – pushing more government spending (not less) and more state control (not less) was, of course, not mentioned. Nor was the fact that Mussolini had been one of the leading Marxists in the world (and remained an admirer of Karl Marx to his dying day – when he was killed by orthodox Marxists who regarded him as a heretic) – and that Progressive Modernist Fascism “everything for the state, nothing outside the state” is just about the opposite of what Jacob Rees-Mogg, and the two ladies, believes in.
This shows just how far the “ideological hegemony” (as the Italian Marxist Gramsci, would have put it) of the left goes – and it is international.
For example, we get the media in African counties talking about “Hate Speech versus Free Speech” – “Free Speech” meaning agreeing with the left, and “Hate Speech” meaning disagreeing with the left.
In many Latin American countries, once bastions of the Roman Catholic Church, abortion is being pushed – and not just people being allowed to have abortions.
No – other people, doctors and nurses are being forced (even in once socially conservative countries such as Ecuador) to take-part-in abortions.
It is not “just” that the babies must be killed – you (reactionary-running-dog) must take part in killing the babies – you must do it with your own hands, or we (the Progressive rulers) will punish you.
It is the ritual humiliation of “reactionaries”, making them culpable (personally involved) in the crimes of the left – and such ritual humiliation is very important to the left (remember Mao’s “Cultural Revolution”).
It will be the same with “Trans Rights”, including for children.
“You reactionary running dog – it is not enough that you accept the sexual mutilation of children, you must do it yourself, you say you do not know how to use drugs and surgical tools – well then use-your-TEETH, do it – NOW!”.
Already in such “civilized, Western” nations as Canada, fathers have been punished for refusing to call their daughters their sons.
And, again, such things are international.
For those interested in the Progressive (Collectivist) economic stance of National Socialism and Fascism – see “The Road to Serfdom” by F.A. Hayek and “Omnipotent Government” by Ludwig Von Mises.
For those interested in see the Progressive Modernist Cultural emergence of Fascism and National Socialism, very much Revolutionary anti Traditionalist movements, see the works of Erik Von Kuehnelt-Leddihn.
Whisper it softly…maybe it should.
Yes, I know this kind of thing would be bad. But if you really despair of our society recovering a respect for liberty and tolerance and the rule of law the “gentle” way, as Paul Marks clearly does and as I am rather beginning to, then what next? Is the future to be a boot stamping on a human face forever?
If not, maybe we have to go through a period of backlash and catharsis before we can recover social tranquility.