 Yn amtod, i'n ddigon i'n dweud o'r ddechrau, ond nid yw'n amlwg ymlaen nhw'n gweithio'r ddysgu o'r ddweud o'r dyflaidio y dyflaidio'n ddechrau, oherwydd yna'r ddau yw'r ddau cyfan o'r ddechrau. Mae'n rhaid i'n ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud, a'i ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud, I ddim yn gofyn yn gwybod i os ysgol yma i'n gwybod i'w ffordd. Mae bod i'n mynd i gweithio i marchud yn y cwanaidd. Ond yn y pethau, mae gennym symud yn ysgrif iawn honi gael ar y gallu cyfnodol yn 200 oes oherwydd sy'n gy布 ar gyfer Anim Llywodraeth. Mae'r rhaid fydd yma yn cael ei g corona, ei gael, rhaid gael, rhaid gael gael a'r ysgrifennu a gael mwyaf. L pawb yn credu sy'n digwydd a'n credu力id pwn i. Mae'r mwyaf yma yn cyfnodol i fus middlach, ac yn yr UK astud, mae'n gwybod am piwg yn cael 41% a oedd yn fwy o arddangos, mae gennym yn 1-8 ar gyfer trefnodol doedd, a bod y ffodol ychydigion yw yw'r oedd arddangos. A, wrth gwrs, yma yn y gweithio ar gyfer y Llywodraeth Slywgol, ychydigion yw 1% o'r pobl yn ymdill yw 45% o'r cyfrifol. Mae'n cyfnod yw'r cyfrifol yn ddod 3 ymgyrch nad oes cyfnodau cyfnodol. Mae'n byw yw'r archwilio fel y ddarllen yn cymhwyl yw'r cyfnodydd, a fe fyddion mi'n ei glwbuster maeth, a bandyn nhw'n fanen nhw'n ddweud, a ma'n ddodod rhaid i gyda'i licio o bach o'r straffiau cyfnodol. A wnaeth rhaid i fod y pwysig hwn i ddiwyddo'i gyntaf foeddewyr i ddiwyddiadau eich cyfreithio o'r cynhyrchu gwirioneddau ar lawero? A yna'n wneud o'r cyfnod o gyfnod o gyfnod o'r mewn cynllun o'r syniadau mae'r cynhyrchu o'r cynhyrchu yn yr economa. 10 yw'n gweithio'r gyflym ac oedd y syniadau yn y Sgol Dwylliannol, sy'n gyfnod o'r cynhyrchu yn ymryd yn amlod yw'r cynllun o'r cyfnod, ac oedd gŵr yn pwysig i ni'n edrych i ddau'r cyfeirio a'r cyfnod o'r cyfnod o'r cyfnod. 10 ysgol cyfnodau cyfnodd yw'r ysgol iawn, ei holl gynnig ei holl gynes, gan rai cyfnodd iawn i'r gweithio'r Llanfa Ffynкtholau a'r Ffynch hefyd yn cyfnodd i'r cyfnodd, a'r gweithio'r llwybr yw'r llwybr yw'r cyfnodd i'r Gweithfynch, yn ddau'r Martin i'r gweithio'r llwybr, ond yn y Hwys of Llywodraeth, y Banker Gwylliant yw'r Whitehall, Nw Clasgwyd Cynwedig, rydyn ni'n mynd i'n ysgolio'r mewn. Rydyn ni'n mynd i'n mynd i'ch gwaith i'ch gyda'r mhessau. Rydyn ni'n gweithio panlion yn y 10 yma, cyfnodd y dyfodol ffyrnau FSA, i'r prif yw'r trefad, ac rydyn ni'n mynd i'ch gweithio'r brif, rydyn ni'n ymddangos fel hynny. Rydyn ni'n mynd i'ch gweithio'r cyfrif, mae rydyn ni'n mynd i'ch gweithio'r arbennig ychydig, Y cychwyn mwybins am ddigonân, ac yn gyfnod ar gerddurfa'n iawn. Mae'n gwybod, a bod efallai'n gwybod a'r cerddur. Chy μyddug o wouldai'n ei oedangos i nid y gallech chi i r ri wedi bod'i rhai. Mae'r cychwyn i ddweud â'r cychwyn i gyd, a'r cychwyn i gyd yn gweithio gweithio'r cychwyn i'r cychwyn i'r that were part of the pre-crisis orthodoxy whether it's the efficient market hypothesis or the rational expectations hypothesis. There's a plethora of evidence to show these aren't correct, but they still persist. I think the failure to really question the financial markets in 2008 and turn the shock of the crash into a programme of reform meant ar y cyfanc ymuno'r cyfr infinite, y ddyn ni'n cyffredd i'r credu cyfrifio ddiogel ymgyrch. A heddiw attack o gyfrifio ni'n gallu cyfrifio addysg wrth amddampu o'r pryd sgwrs a ond ar y OECD, Y IMF ac oedd o'r bydd ymweld o'r ein strifyrio unigoddiad. Oherwydd dych chi'n gweithio o'r cyfrifio ar gyfrifio ar gyfrifio'r cyfrifio ymnegol. Mae'n r�od arwant y gwahanol hefyd yn fawr i'r credu cyfrifio ar gyfrifio'r credu llai. Mark Carney, the Bank of England governor, has recently made statements where he said that the UK should double the size of the financial sector over the next 25 years. He also said that the UK should become Europe's investment banker post Brexit. Now the idea that either of these things are in line with the Bank of England's mission, which is to promote the good of the people of the UK, is completely unfounded. There's absolutely no evidence that a large financial sector relative to the size of your economy results in better resource allocation or better returns for savers and investors. If anything, the opposite seems to be the case. The financial sector is inherently rent seeking and so its growth is a result of extracting greater and greater rent from the rest of the economy. This should be a cause for concern and not celebration. The city's contribution to growth and jobs, although often applauded by politicians, is vastly outweighed by financial instability. The cost of the last crisis is estimated at £7.4 trillion to have costed the UK. Even if we look at bank lending and where it goes in the good times, how much of it goes into the productive economy, it's pretty dismal with less than 10% of new loans going towards businesses. The vast majority is to property and financial markets, which results in the UK economy being skewed towards an oversized financial sector, housing bubbles, asset price inflation and people are having to rely on taking on more and more debt to top up falling incomes. And despite delivering negligible social benefit, they still receive a massive public subsidy. As Martin spoke about, banks create money when they make loans and they have this unique privilege and they're able to do it in the knowledge that if any of those loans go bad, the state will step in to protect citizens' deposits. And this protection means that they can charge really high interest on loans while at the same time not giving any return to depositors. And this public subsidy, the New Economics Foundation has estimated, is around £25 billion a year. And when there's a recession, the UK taxpayer, the state will step in and bail them out, which was to tune of over £130 billion in the crash. But obviously the cost, as I said earlier, was estimated at £7.4 trillion, a vast amount of money. So, what can we do? When the UK were dominated by five shareholder banks, it's obvious interests are to their shareholders primarily, so that needs to change. But what we should be questioning now is our public institutions, the Bank of England, the Treasury that should be putting society's interests first, whether they are. And there's a sense that the Bank of England and Treasury understand that we can't go back to pre-crisis finance. So, Mark Carney caveated his statement about doubling the finance sector by saying that we need tough regulation. So, he does think that the finance sector should be tamed, but not changed. And there's clearly not been a discussion in any of those institutions around what is actually the purpose of finance. So, my organisation Positive Money was founded with a radical vision to challenge the way money is created. And we quickly understood two things, that first of all it was a bit of a taboo to talk about how money is created, less of a taboo now. And secondly, that there's a huge lack of knowledge in this area. And we witnessed that in the election early in the year when Theresa May questioned a nurse and said that the nurse didn't deserve a pay rise because there was no magic money tree. Now, clearly it wasn't just Theresa May's lack of understanding of the monetary system that led her to make that statement. There's also political ideology at play, but very few people are aware that there are two large magic money trees. We have commercial banks, they create money when they make loans, and we have central banks. And central banks across the world have been creating vast amounts of money through quantitative easing since the crash. The way QE works is it floods financial markets with money, it creates money and buys financial assets from mostly government bonds. And the idea is that it should encourage bank lending, essentially trickle down, it doesn't work. And there's no evidence it's had a very good effect and it is literally making the rich richer by boosting asset prices. Right after the crash we probably could have forgiven this policy as maybe being the best tool available in a hurry. But when the Bank of England announced its expansion of QE last August after Brexit, a policy they know will increase the wealth of the top 5% when wealth inequality is threatening social cohesion in the UK. The idea that that is the best that they can do, some of the brightest minds in this country, is completely unacceptable. So we know we need people to shift the debate and so whilst we like holding debates with very intelligent people and getting the discussion about how we do reform, we also know people power matters. And so we've been, hopefully some people in this room were also with us outside the Bank of England twice. We've mobilised over 10,000 people and we got the Treasury Select Committee to start an inquiry into monetary policy. Questioning ideas like why are they doing corporate QE, where they pick corporations to buy bonds in, why are they doing QE when they could be doing alternatives. Monetary financing, QE for people, there's also a range of options. Unfortunately the quarry's got shelves because of the election so now we are calling on Nicky Morgan who's the new chair of the Treasury Select Committee to reopen it. And I'd urge all of you to email your MP, I think you can do it via our website. But actually these things matter because in these turbulent and uncertain times what is clear is that the most important and powerful macroeconomic institutions we have, central banks, are not being adequately scrutinised. And if what emerges from the current breakdown of the system does not seek to democratise central banks and does not seek to democratise the financial sector at large, then it's going to be very difficult for what to emerge to be fairer, more democratic and more equal. Thank you.