This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk-news/2013/jul/08/banking-decision-remittances-hurt-minorities-barclays
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| This banking decision on remittances will hurt ethnic minorities | This banking decision on remittances will hurt ethnic minorities |
| (2 months later) | |
| Thank God for bankers, I say. Journalists, we're not popular – but bankers, they're in a different league. | Thank God for bankers, I say. Journalists, we're not popular – but bankers, they're in a different league. |
| More self-harm to report: a single decision with the potential to devastate the finances of millions, blight some of the poorest communities in the developing world and throw a spanner in the workings of our aid agencies. | More self-harm to report: a single decision with the potential to devastate the finances of millions, blight some of the poorest communities in the developing world and throw a spanner in the workings of our aid agencies. |
| The issue is remittances, the money minorities send abroad to relatives. In theory, we like remittances and there are plenty of them. The trade is worth $530bn worldwide, says the World Bank, and $2bn here. They help communities grow, or maybe just stay afloat. The coalition likes them. It means not having to stump up so much aid. Multinational money transfer firms such as Western Union and Moneygram handle much of the cash, but some people find them expensive and their coverage in remote areas lacking. | The issue is remittances, the money minorities send abroad to relatives. In theory, we like remittances and there are plenty of them. The trade is worth $530bn worldwide, says the World Bank, and $2bn here. They help communities grow, or maybe just stay afloat. The coalition likes them. It means not having to stump up so much aid. Multinational money transfer firms such as Western Union and Moneygram handle much of the cash, but some people find them expensive and their coverage in remote areas lacking. |
| So there are a multitude of smaller firms. And all was well until a few weeks ago when Barclays, which provided banking facilities, decided it didn't want to do it any more because it fears the smaller firms might be used for money laundering and funding terrorism. But we are regulated by the appropriate authorities in the UK, the firms said. Sorry, said the bank. We're at risk. Not our problem. | So there are a multitude of smaller firms. And all was well until a few weeks ago when Barclays, which provided banking facilities, decided it didn't want to do it any more because it fears the smaller firms might be used for money laundering and funding terrorism. But we are regulated by the appropriate authorities in the UK, the firms said. Sorry, said the bank. We're at risk. Not our problem. |
| Barclays planned to pull the plug on 10 July, giving some of the 250 firms affected just a few weeks' notice. After a fuss was made and people such as Bethnal Green MP Rushanara Ali began asking questions, the bank set the deadline back a month. But it's just a stay of execution. | Barclays planned to pull the plug on 10 July, giving some of the 250 firms affected just a few weeks' notice. After a fuss was made and people such as Bethnal Green MP Rushanara Ali began asking questions, the bank set the deadline back a month. But it's just a stay of execution. |
| Why can't the remittances firms bank elsewhere? Because Barclays, with its links in the developing world, was the last providing bespoke services, and anyway the entire grassroots sector has now been branded suspect. Why will the effect be devastating? Because either the remittances will stop, or the transfers will continue underground and unregulated, with risks to all concerned. | Why can't the remittances firms bank elsewhere? Because Barclays, with its links in the developing world, was the last providing bespoke services, and anyway the entire grassroots sector has now been branded suspect. Why will the effect be devastating? Because either the remittances will stop, or the transfers will continue underground and unregulated, with risks to all concerned. |
| Why will aid agencies be affected? Because, says Abdirashid Duale, CEO of Dahabshill – which transfers many thousands of pounds to Somalia – and Edward Paice, director of the Africa Research Institute, agencies often use the remittance firms to pay their staff. | Why will aid agencies be affected? Because, says Abdirashid Duale, CEO of Dahabshill – which transfers many thousands of pounds to Somalia – and Edward Paice, director of the Africa Research Institute, agencies often use the remittance firms to pay their staff. |
| This is why a campaign, orchestrated by Ali and last week discussed in parliament, is gathering speed, and clued-up ministers grow anxious. Those bankers, eh? What next? | This is why a campaign, orchestrated by Ali and last week discussed in parliament, is gathering speed, and clued-up ministers grow anxious. Those bankers, eh? What next? |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. | Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. |
Previous version
1
Next version