16th June 2011
The Chancellor used the word 24 times in his speech on Wednesday evening, says the report, while Governor of the Bank of England, Sir Mervyn, used "new" a total of 17 times in his Mansion House speech, mainly to describe how the world economy was "adjusting from an unstable disequilibrium to a new equilibrium" where "failure to tackle the imbalances during the seven years of plenty before 2007 threatens seven lean years thereafter."
"Economy" was another important word for the Chancellor, although less so for the amount of times used (15 compared with 2010's nine) than the context it was used in.
In his 2010 Mansion House speech, Mr Osborne was keen to emphasise the "protection" and "responsibility" owed to the British economy, while this year's speech described the economy more in terms of "recovering" and "rebalancing".
mentallentil commented on the report: "How many times did Sir Merv use the word "sorry"?"
Regulation was also mentioned much less in Sir Mervyn's 2011 speech, with 11 mentions compared with 17 in 2010.
Elsewhere, on a more serious note, the Guardian comments on Osborne's speech: "When it comes to overhauling the banks, there is one handy rule of thumb: if it isn't hurting, it isn't working. Bankers must inevitably face some pain if taxpayers are to be made safer and economies more productive.
"This is not about retribution or vindictiveness, but simply an acknowledgment of the reality that the scope and scale of the changes to the banking system necessary to avoid a rerun of the great crisis of 2008-09 are big and radical. And this has been a matter of consensus between regulators, central bank chiefs, economists and politicians. Indeed, in the runup to last May's general election, Vince Cable and George Osborne competed with each other for the prize of being toughest on the banks.
"Yet, listening tonight to Mr Osborne's second Mansion House speech as chancellor, it was clear that he had nothing up his sleeve that would cause any banker much discomfort.
"…To this end, he briefed newspapers of his support for a ringfence around the retail operations of big banks, so that giant losses from their investment operations would not force the taxpayers to step in again. This is not a bad idea, as far as it goes; the only trouble is that it does not go very far."
To receive our free weekly email sign up here.