Best ethical savings account

theyellowlizard

Hiya.

I'm a complete moron with all things money-related, so am throwing myself open to you all for help!

I currently have an Investment Account with National Savings & Investment for my very small savings (currently a couple of grand which one day might be used as a deposit on a house). I also add about £30 a month to it by standing order.

The interest rate I get for it is 3.25%, which I'm guessing is pretty poor, so I'm looking to change. Having read some of the stuff on the website, it's clear I can get a better deal elsewhere, but I'm very keen to only open an account with a bank who have ethical policies (so that'll be a big fat 'no' to Barclays et al).

Any suggestions? The only real caveat is that I need to still have access to the savings - although I don't make many withdrawals, I need to be able to get to it for one-off expenses (like getting my crock of a car repaired etc).

One other thing which may help is that I'm still technically a student if that's likely to get me a better rate anywhere!

Help appreciated! :whistle:

isofa

Morals and ethics differ person to person, some of the best rates are with Icelandic banks (Icesave and Kaupthing Edge - both offering instant access high rate savings and fixed term "bonds" too), but if you take a stand against with the country's whaling policy, that'll be out.

Firstsave is a Nigerian Bank - and morally again a highly suspect choice!

But then arguable, NS&I, government savings could be a tricky ethical decision too, a government that has been partly to blame for global instability, war etc.

Skipton Building Society and many other of the UK mutals are good choices, I doubt any of these will have any massive unethical practices, and you'll get interest of 5% if not higher.

Co-operative Bank (part of the co-op) is always a popular ethical choice, but I'm not aware of any great rates they are currently offering.

Have a look at the best buys at Moneyfacts.

KeithEssex_2

At the risk of being controversial ... why not opt for the highest rate possible and then make a donation to your favourite charity using some of the proceeds ?

Ultimately all money washes around the financial system very quickly so why not just recognise this fact and make use of tax advantages available re: charitable donations ?

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/help-and-advice/advice-banks/article.html?in_advicepage_id=103&in_article_id=395448&in_page_id=90

This would do some good in the world that you would clearly be able to "see" (e.g. donation to a 3rd world charity) rather than just opting for a Bank that normally promote their ethical stance as a way of attracting more customers. (Sorry - but I'm rather cynical about them all !)

Voyager2002

KeithEssex wrote: »

At the risk of being controversial ... why not opt for the highest rate possible and then make a donation to your favourite charity using some of the proceeds ?

Ultimately all money washes around the financial system very quickly so why not just recognise this fact and make use of tax advantages available re: charitable donations ?

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/help-and-advice/advice-banks/article.html?in_advicepage_id=103&in_article_id=395448&in_page_id=90

This would do some good in the world that you would clearly be able to "see" (e.g. donation to a 3rd world charity) rather than just opting for a Bank that normally promote their ethical stance as a way of attracting more customers. (Sorry - but I'm rather cynical about them all !)

However, if the interest was earned through investing in the arms trade (say) then giving a little of it away would not be enough to put things right. Surely it is reasonable to seek to provide capital for people doing positive things to earn a living.

Several of the building societies (Nationwide in particular) are offering reasonable rates, particularly if you are willing to tie up your money for a year. And their activities are certainly acceptable on the ethical front.

KeithEssex_2

Voyager2002 wrote: »

However, if the interest was earned through investing in the arms trade (say) then giving a little of it away would not be enough to put things right. Surely it is reasonable to seek to provide capital for people doing positive things to earn a living.

Several of the building societies (Nationwide in particular) are offering reasonable rates, particularly if you are willing to tie up your money for a year. And their activities are certainly acceptable on the ethical front.

99.9% of any money that you deposit will simply be lent to other customers such as yourself.

As for the arms trade - we need our Armed Forces to protect our country so the production of arms is perfectly ethical to my mind. The Government is best placed to decide which countries are repressive regimes (e.g. Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Russia, China etc.) and where trade with them is inappropriate.

The "Ethical Account" badge is used as a marketing ploy by the vast majority of the Banks.

theyellowlizard

Thanks for the tips so far - all much appreciated. Keep them coming!

Disagree, Keith, that the 'ethical' slogan is just a marketing ploy. I have my current account with Co-Operative, and they really do live by the principles they espouse. I like the theory of banking unethically and then giving it away, but I think it's important for the banks to realise that they will lose (some) customers unless they shape up, which is why I'd probably discount that approach personally.

And I find your faith in our government to place sanctions on repressive regimes touching and naive in equal measure!

Thanks for the advice though!

[Deleted User]

Couple of links I've found searching this site:

http://blog.moneysavingexpert.com/2007/11/09/ethical-schmethical%E2%80%A6-the-co-ops-new-think-ethical-credit-card/

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=123587&highlight=ethical

isofa

KeithEssex wrote: »

99.9% of any money that you deposit will simply be lent to other customers such as yourself.
As for the arms trade - we need our Armed Forces to protect our country so the production of arms is perfectly ethical to my mind. The Government is best placed to decide which countries are repressive regimes (e.g. Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Russia, China etc.) and where trade with them is inappropriate.
The "Ethical Account" badge is used as a marketing ploy by the vast majority of the Banks.

Although not wishing to sound rude, I couldn't disagree more.

The Co-op and several other "ethical" banks, do a great deal to run their organisations by moral and ethical values - if you believe that is a marketing ploy then you are mistaken. I suggest reading good investigative papers.

Also, depending on your stance, one could also disagree with finding the production of arms ethical, anti war campaigners, rightly or wrongly would, regardless of the defence issue. All the arms back-handedly sold to Iraq, then we go to war with the country (upon very dodgy ground), fighting against their own weapons. Ethical?

Finally allowing the government to be "best placed to decide which countries are repressive regimes", is probably the most flawed idea of them all, let alone naive.

The British government is quite happy to trade with the middle eastern countries such as Saudi, which run massive oppressive regimes against women, let alone the brutality allowed in the name of justice to the rest of it's citizens - so because the UK government thinks this is ok, we should all turn a blind eye?

Then of course we have the USA, one of the countries, according to Amnesty International, that has an incredibly poor human rights record. Guantanamo Bay anyone?

The list goes on, to implicitly trust the government is the most foolish thing anyone can do in my opinion.

I think we should champion theyellowlizard for being someone who considers the moral aspect rather than the best rate going, and to hell with everything else.

Voyager2002

KeithEssex wrote: »

99.9% of any money that you deposit will simply be lent to other customers such as yourself.

As for the arms trade - we need our Armed Forces to protect our country so the production of arms is perfectly ethical to my mind. The Government is best placed to decide which countries are repressive regimes (e.g. Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Russia, China etc.) and where trade with them is inappropriate.

The "Ethical Account" badge is used as a marketing ploy by the vast majority of the Banks.

Not true: the banking system is an important source of capital for all kinds of business.

And the system for controlling the international arms trade has more holes in it than a sieve. And that is not getting into whether most reasonable people would agree with the decisions that our government makes in this area.

KeithEssex_2

theyellowlizard wrote: »

Thanks for the tips so far - all much appreciated. Keep them coming!

Disagree, Keith, that the 'ethical' slogan is just a marketing ploy. I have my current account with Co-Operative, and they really do live by the principles they espouse. I like the theory of banking unethically and then giving it away, but I think it's important for the banks to realise that they will lose (some) customers unless they shape up, which is why I'd probably discount that approach personally.

And I find your faith in our government to place sanctions on repressive regimes touching and naive in equal measure!

Thanks for the advice though!

I guess that we have different views of the world.

My main point is that selectively closing a few banks accounts (that can easily move elsewhere) achieves very little in the real world.

It does make a great gesture of course and is actively used by Banks to gain market share.

I definitely don't have faith in government to do anything properly (especially the current bunch) but theoretically they are in much better position to implement policies that address human rights abuses, gross inequality etc.

Having said all that - it's always good to have a lively debate - so thanks for keeping the comments nice and good luck with your hunt

KeithEssex_2

isofa wrote: »

Although not wishing to sound rude, I couldn't disagree more.

The Co-op and several other "ethical" banks, do a great deal to run their organisations by moral and ethical values - if you believe that is a marketing ploy then you are mistaken. I suggest reading good investigative papers.

Also, depending on your stance, one could also disagree with finding the production of arms ethical, anti war campaigners, rightly or wrongly would, regardless of the defence issue. All the arms back-handedly sold to Iraq, then we go to war with the country (upon very dodgy ground), fighting against their own weapons. Ethical?

Finally allowing the government to be "best placed to decide which countries are repressive regimes", is probably the most flawed idea of them all, let alone naive.

The British government is quite happy to trade with the middle eastern countries such as Saudi, which run massive oppressive regimes against women, let alone the brutality allowed in the name of justice to the rest of it's citizens - so because the UK government thinks this is ok, we should all turn a blind eye?

Then of course we have the USA, one of the countries, according to Amnesty International, that has an incredibly poor human rights record. Guantanamo Bay anyone?

The list goes on, to implicitly trust the government is the most foolish thing anyone can do in my opinion.

I think we should champion theyellowlizard for being someone who considers the moral aspect rather than the best rate going, and to hell with everything else.

If you deposit your money with an Ethical Bank (e.g. The Co-op) what happens when they simply lend it to Barclays ?

Also, my original post suggested donating the money to a worthy charity so the "to hell with everyone else" label you try and give me is a little unfair .

My point is that the economics mean that "Ethical" is merely a label for people with good intentions who will never be able to fulfil them unless they operate in a vacuum.

Where someone decides to open a current account in the UK won't change the situation in the Middle East one bit. A general election might however.

p.s. Re: your point above. I read the Times, FT and Telegraph daily so I would have thought that would be sufficient to give me an adequate perspective. We simply disagree about "Ethical Accounts".