So here we go again. We all knew that the credit crunch, turned economic crisis, turned looming recession, was going to get worse before it got better, writes blogger Amy Bould.

But today’s announcement of a second Government bank bail-out only shows that for all the talk of spending out of a recession, could Gordon Brown actually be throwing good money after bad?

Ultimately, what it means for taxpayers is that we will be forced to pay the cost of keeping the banks going and keeping the money markets moving.

What it means for our children is that they will be saddled with huge debts, born into a country with an economy in crisis and no light at the end of the tunnel.

And of course, the idea of a second bank bail-out must surely mean the first one has failed, or at least, was ill-conceived.

Certainly the initial £37 billion lifeline has failed to provide a sufficient platform for normal lending to resume.

It also carried an onerous 12 per cent rate of interest, encouraging banks to pay back the Government quickly rather than easing lending terms for would-be home owners.

In effect, the main thrust of the new plan by Gordon Brown will provide banks with an insurance policy with the tax payer as the underwriter.

Around £200 billion of “bad assets” are believed to be held by the banks, which will now be able to pay a fee to ring-fence these debts, giving them the opportunity to free-up capital to start lending again.

Gordon Brown’s frustration with the banks is clear to see – he says today’s announcement is all about people having access to mortgages at prices they can afford.

Whether the banks will see it that way is another matter entirely.