A former chancellor of the exchequer has said that bankers "were force-fed like foie gras geese" during years leading up to the financial crisis and should not take all the blame.
During a debate on the pre-Budget report in the Lords yesterday Lord Lamont of Lerwick (Con) said regulators and central banks had to take a share of the responsibility for creating a situation in which it was "almost impossible not to make money".
City minister Lord Myners said: "The actions taken by the government have helped our economy to start to emerge from the crisis."
"The 2009 PBR has been delivered at a time when the economy is starting to see signs of recovery, after a tumultuous time for the world economy.
"Co-ordinated action by governments around the world has helped to revive confidence in markets.
"The challenge that we face now is to take action to secure the recovery and to promote long-term growth."
"Cutting support now could derail the work done so far and risk the recovery," he added, taking a swipe at Conservative policy.
"There will be more to be done-not just now, but over the next few years.
"The PBR sets out actions to secure the recovery, to build our future, and to ensure that we have the means to do so while ensuring controlled public finances."
Lord Kirkwood of Kirkhope (Lib Dem) said: "We need to provide the leadership that is necessary to persuade the country that we are all in this together.
"We must face up to the fact that the country is poorer and that the steps that we need to take to deal with that will be unpleasant.
"Any future misery will need to be fairly shared, which is much more difficult if there is a unique level of alienation from the political classes in the United Kingdom."
He said: "I do not think that the government's plans are credible or that the risk to our country's credit rating is being addressed seriously enough.
"The growth forecasts are unrealistic and far too optimistic. Moreover, the causes of all of this-the incompetence of the central bankers and the inefficiency of the stock markets in reflecting real value-remain."
Lord Renton of Mount Harry (Con) said it would be much better if the opposition and government could agree that there was a crisis and "basically agree" what measures should be taken to deal with it.
"If that does not happen, there are disputes and wrangles which make for a much worse loss of confidence, nationally.
"One of the problems with this is that if the United Kingdom loses its triple-A credit standing, which some newspapers tell us is a possibility for the future, it will in my judgment be largely because the newspapers are so busy telling us what a crisis we are in.
"We need rather more quietness and confidence, and rather more of an ability to take a long-term view."
Of the PBR Baroness O'Cathain (Con) said: "Not only do I not approve of the report; most of the commentators-most of the financial experts and economists-have serious reservations about it."
She added: "For years I have hoped that these reports and Budgets would be clear and straightforward in their content, but that has been hope unfulfilled.
"All that has happened is that they have become ever glossier.
"Production companies must rub their hands in glee when they win a contract to publish these documents-sorry, perhaps I should say books-consisting of 211 pages and a very glossy cover."
Lord Bilimoria (CB) said the PBR is a "clear example" that the UK has lost its sense of balance.
"We seem to have lost our sense of priorities and, quite frankly, many people are saying that the government may have lost the plot," he told peers.
"The state has become too big and too wasteful; it is now not aiding society and business but burdening them."
Lord Barnett (Lab) said the government is right to proceed along the path that they are going.
"The plain fact is that if you are spending £700 billion, there will be inefficiency," he said.
"If the most efficient people in the world were spending as much as £700 billion, there would be bound to be potential for savings.
"Eleven billion pounds spent on the smarter procedure is petty cash in that context-much more could be found.
"I wish that I could propose a way in which to cut the deficit painlessly, but I cannot. I would love to hear someone in this debate tell me a way."
Lord Ryder of Wensum (Con) called the PBR "yet another dodgy dossier with counterfeit forecasts".
Conservative Treasury spokesman Baroness Noakes recalled the story of Penelope.
"While waiting for Odysseus to return, she laboured by day to weave a robe but at night unravelled it and started again the following day," she told peers.
"Our modern-day Penelope is the chancellor of the exchequer.
"He weaves his budgets and PBRs by day, but by night they are unravelled.
"The only difference is that it is not the chancellor who does the unravelling: they do it all by themselves, with a little help from the Institute for Fiscal Studies.
"Penelope's objective, of course, was to avoid the undesirable suitors who pursued her.
"The chancellor has no such excuse. No one lusts after the chancellor and his plans for our economy."
Bringing the debate to a close, Lord Myners defended the government’s "action to support the economy while uncertainties and risks remain".
He said debt would be reduced "when the time is right".
"It is absolutely critical that we do so.
"No one in government or on my own benches should believe for one moment that we can or will flinch from making those difficult decisions once we believe that the economy is firmly in a state of strong recovery."
