The FT reveals the complete hypocrisy of the UK's banks a revealed in their submissions to the Banking Commission. As they note:

Britain’s biggest banks have hit back at threats to break them up, saying there is no evidence that a sweeping overhaul would make the financial system safer.

In lengthy submissions to the government-appointed Independent Commission on Banking, published on Wednesday, they set out their strongest arguments yet for keeping retail and investment banking operations under one roof.

I wonder, what evidence do we need of failure before action is needed?

They answer that themselves. They say the evidence is failure is evidenced by state act. As the FT notes:

Their ripostes were, however, met with equally firm calls from senior industry figures to split up Lloyds Banking Group and Royal Bank of Scotland.

Sir George Mathewson, former head of RBS, said the commission should think seriously about breaking up the partly nationalised bank by unwinding its takeover of NatWest — a deal he led in 2000.

In a personal response to Sir John Vickers, chairman of the commission, he also recommended reversing Lloyds’ purchase of HBOS. The combined group now provides a third of UK bank accounts and a quarter of small business loans.

“I believe that in the interests of competition the merger of HBOS and Lloyds was misconceived,” Sir George said.

Of course: all that went wrong, including the fact that they were bailed out at enormous cost to all in circumstances where if the bail out had not occurred we would, quite literally , have seen the failure of money in our economy and decent into social chaos; all that was the fault of the government who must now ensure that the banks that did not fall into state control must have their competitors reduced in size do that their monopoly profits might be increased.

Of course that's the right course of action now. How silly of me not to realise.

Alternatively, Sky Sports has shown that there is an appropriate course of action to take towards those who make asinine comment: you dismiss them.

The same approach should be adopted towards these banks.

They, like sexist sports commentators, think they can utter whatever they wish because they have become so far removed from reality by the power they think they wield. And it is that perception of power on their part that represents the danger to others that they represent, and in itself it is the foundation of their undoing.

There is one answer for these banks - and it is to break them all up - with investment banking sent back where it belongs - to the market, without support from the state, underpinned by a demand from regulators for massive capital to prevent failure. Meanwhile plain vanilla banking needs to be just that. And the state will have to underpin it - I know - which is why it will be heavily regulated and taxed.

This is what we had until the dogmatic folly of Thatcher et al began to undermine society. We must have it agin.