Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


HBOS chief: "I am convinced we have done the right thing"

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 23 September 2008
THE chief executive of HBOS broke his silence last night to tell The Scotsman that "the vast majority" of Scottish jobs would be saved after the takeover of his bank, which he said would create "a real monster powerhouse" north of the Border.
Andy Hornby spoke out on the day the First Minister called an emergency summit of the country's business leaders. Alex Salmond said he would fight to ensure the global headquarters of the superbank would be in Scotland and promised to put pressure on Lloyds TSB at a meeting today in order to protect national interests.

However, one leading economist warned that Mr Salmond's plans were likely to fall flat – and he claimed that putting too much political pressure on the bank could discourage investment in Scotland.

Questions were still being asked over the probity of the £12.2 billion takeover deal. The Scotsman understands two separate investigations are taking place into alleged insider trading and delays in making an announcement to the Stock Exchange. Meanwhile, the FTSE fell back into the red yesterday after its record-breaking Friday, as investors awaited more details of the US government's £380 billion bail-out of banks' bad debts.

Mr Hornby, whose position in the new superbank is yet to be determined, insisted the "Bank of Scotland brand is going to be absolutely to the forefront" of its operations. He said: "When you think of the scale of the Scottish business going forward, it will be even bigger than the current Scottish operations.

"Lloyds themselves have got a decent-sized Scottish operation, so it will be a real monster powerhouse in Scotland, with The Mound as the central area."

The one-time "boy wonder" of the banking industry said he was "absolutely convinced that this is the right deal for HBOS to be part of a group which will be one of the largest and strongest institutions in the European banking industry, let alone just the UK banking industry".

And he insisted that while Eric Daniels, the chief executive of Lloyds TSB, has said it would take three years to determine the final number of job losses, "the vast majority of colleagues will stay, because of the sheer scale of the combined businesses".

The Scotsman has also seen an e-mail which Mr Hornby wrote to his staff on Sunday night. In it, he admitted that the week of the takeover had been "the most tiring and emotional week in my working life".

He also stressed that he had "done the right thing", that the new institution would be a "financial powerhouse" and that HBOS shareholders would share in the benefits.

On the question of jobs, he went on: "It is, of course, the case that the merger will inevitably lead to some job reductions. However, the majority of HBOS colleagues are likely to stay with the enlarged group, reflecting the sheer scale of our business. Moreover, for most colleagues, the impact of the merger is unlikely to be immediate, as integration will take at least two to three years to complete."

Meanwhile, Mr Salmond yesterday brought together politicians and business leaders to ensure Scotland would get the "best possible deal" in the wake of the proposed takeover.

After the Edinburgh meeting, which he co-chaired with Lesley Sawers, the chief executive of the Scottish Council for Development and Industry, the First Minister vowed to fight to have the headquarters of the new bank located in Scotland.

Mr Salmond denied it was too late to try to persuade Lloyds TSB to base the new, merged organisation in Scotland, or at least to have important decision-making in Edinburgh.

"The key decisions have not yet been taken," he said. "Therefore, we have a full opportunity to represent a Scottish view, a united Scottish view, in terms of seeking to defend jobs and decision-making and headquarters functions."

He said he had been given hope by the fact that Archie Kane, the chief executive of Scottish Widows, part of the Lloyds TSB group, would be looking at the new arrangements because of his strong Scottish links.

Mr Salmond's meeting at lunchtime today will not be with Sir Victor Blank, the chairman of Lloyds TSB, but the First Minister said he had spoken to him several times.

However, David Bell, professor of economics at Stirling University, said it would be "very difficult" to retain "any truly executive functions in Edinburgh", adding: "It'll be very difficult for the new bank to avoid taking key decisions in London."

He warned the Scottish Government to "tread carefully" and not to put excessive political pressure on the new bank as "the outcome could be that it ends up putting off other companies from investing in Scotland".

After yesterday's meeting with 58 business representatives, Mr Salmond insisted HBOS was "hardwired to not only the Scottish economy, but Scottish society" in the projects it supported across the country, including sport.

He refused to be drawn on questions of whether the merger and potential loss of a major bank from Scotland was necessary after the recovery of shares in banks, including HBOS, late last week following intervention by the US government.

He also refused to comment on concerns raised about suggestions there had been "an abuse of the market", with talks going on for six weeks between the two banks before they were officially declared.

In a show of political unity, Mr Salmond was joined yesterday by the leaders of the other major parties in Scotland – Labour's Iain Gray, the Conservatives' Annabel Goldie, Tavish Scott from the Liberal Democrats and Robin Harper for the Greens.

Summit makes it clear takeover means much more than first thought

Takeover hit by inquiry No2 after £200m 'insider dealing'

Q & A: Nagging concerns over way deal was pulled together

Interview: 'It'll be a monster-size power house in Scotland centred on the Mound'

Rivals make a killing as nervous investors pull funds

New rules crack down on short-selling 'spivs and speculators'

Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 23 September 2008 1:53 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Halifax Bank of Scotland
 
1

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 00:05:02


"I am convinced we have done the right thing"

So will I be, if one pays me the wages you get!

For goodness Sake! Your no,..'YES' man are you,?
2

,

23/09/2008 00:11:15
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
3

,

23/09/2008 00:12:06
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
4

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 00:27:50


McPravda blog ~4,

Well I had a look, but your link page made no sense and was,...'all far too confusing'!

This was last week I think.
5

jimboo,

one step in the past 23/09/2008 01:17:47
Seems this was all a con used to override the monopoly and competition laws and has been in the pipeline for months, HBOS was already being sold down the river. oh well who, except the workers, cares.
6

Robert Dunn,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 02:10:20
"The Road to Hell is paved with good intentions", surely never more appropriate. Should "things" go wrong, we can be certain Mr Hornby will receive the usual mega-bucks pay-off, For him a sure-fire "Win-Win situation"
7

JamesMc,

Asia 23/09/2008 02:33:33
Hold on..not a mention of Andy Hornby's expected 2 million pounds pay-off for selling Scottish jobs and an ancient Scottish institution down the drain.

This article displays complete bias from the Scotsman. Salmond and the Scottish Government are trying to save jobs and our banking credentials, why would the Scotsman decide to attack that? Have the journalists in this paper no sense of fair, independent, balanced reporting? I live in China and even in a communist country the reporting is fairer than the garbage put out by this rag.
8

ChinaBear,

Hong Kong 23/09/2008 03:18:20
Because JamesMc, Mr Fish has absolutely no credentials when it comes to tinkering with a large British company. It's completely out of his league and he knows it. His bleating causes nothing but a minor inconvenience to the mechanics of a business that resides in the main, South of the border.
9

stewart cameron,

New West BC 23/09/2008 04:38:32
What a load of tripe! It is a PR job and nothing more!
My estimate is about 5,000 jobs will be lost as a result of this cheap takeover.

Another vote for the mealy mouthed rich?
10

JamesMc,

Hong Kong 23/09/2008 04:58:23
ChinaBear

Salmond has a MA from St Andrews in Economics and was the chief economist for RBS on North Sea Oil - I think he's qualified - I also think you have your head where the sun dont shine.

One has to fight their own corner, and thankfully views such as those who write for the Scotsman are becoming a minority.

Good luck to the consortium that are trying to bail the Bank out in Scotlands best intersts
11

Cappo Del Monte,

23/09/2008 06:32:00
He should have stuck to toy trains and train sets, he was much better at that.
Its a whiotewash and a cover up, the whole deal stinks and liebour down south are assisting in the cover up with no monopolies commission
A full and independant investigation should take place, the shareholders should insist on it before allowing the merger, thousands of jobs and sharholders lose in this cover up.
12

Eel Larvae,

Toronto 23/09/2008 06:49:17
Once again another CEO will be rewarded for failure. Sell the family milk cow for a handfull of beans and walk away with millions. Those who hate the west must be enjoying this greatly and are probab;y a little envious that they didn't think of it.

Such a parcel of rogues in a nation!
13

Rufus T. Firefly,

23/09/2008 07:12:17
So Salmond is fighting to ensure that the new HQ of the superbank will be in Scotland.

What a clown.

Such a decision will be made by the board determined by what is in their best interests commercially and by what is in the best interests of the shareholders.

Salmond will be ignored. They will pay lip service to him, nothing more.
14

Walter Ego,

Durness 23/09/2008 07:16:32
Of course it was the right thing to do and we can only hope that Gordon Brown now pushes ahead with a programme of nationalisation of financial insitutions and renationalisation of public utilities.
15

Rufus T. Firefly,

23/09/2008 07:21:54
#17 Walter, you are living in dreamland if you think that might happen.
16

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 23/09/2008 07:28:33
"of combining these two businesses with their fantastic collection of brands"

Nyee Hah. Even the likes of Hornby can make the "right choice". Every year or so whenever there's a statistical blue moon.

"Remember the grand plan? Seeking to extend its reach in 1999, Scotland's oldest bank, the Bank of Scotland, started working with the oleaginous American televangelist Pat Robertson on a £30m deal to launch a telephone and internet banking arm in the United States. Both partners thought it was a marriage made in heaven. But the deal had its downside."

A different type of banking is needed based in Scotland to SERVE the needs of local business. On this ethic: the customer comes first, then the (bank) employees, then the directors and shareholders. It's not unprecedented, we've had trustee and mutual systems that worked (some still do) well in their day.
These new banks could take up the slack in unemployed financial skills that merger-mania creates.

Let the powerhouse brands strut their stuff into the great oblivion. I hope it's been a wake up call to the Scottish people that monetary reform (try the British Association for Monetary Reform) is crucial. Time for Scots to be pioneers in their own land.
17

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 07:35:50
16

Absolutely True Rufus must be a first for a troll on these blogs.
However what Salmond hopes to acheive here is 5 fold.

1. He emphisises that this merger is an attack on a Scottish institute by an English one in colusion with the UK government.
2. He expresses his personal view he is against it.
3. He tells us all that if he had the power to prevent it he would have.
4. He reminds us all how helpless Scotland is within the union.
5. He is still willing to at least try to reduce the impact of the damage done to Scotland by the UK government.

Its called politics troll and he,s head and shoulders above anything the unionist parties can put up.
18

McDiarmid,

Bangkok 23/09/2008 07:46:16
The BOS HQ on the mound is not wanted by Wetherspoons...how about using it as the parking wardens HQ (and employing a few more also..)
19

Corrennie,

23/09/2008 07:49:00
## 20 ##

Yes, yes..........the great anti-Scottish conspiracy theory, being milked by Slug-face Salmond for all it's worth.

Too bad the Omnipotent One didn't see this coming but then hindsight is a wonderful thing.
20

Nevsky,

Moscow 23/09/2008 07:58:08
Good to see everyone coming together on this, Scottish business, Labour, SNP and the Tories. This is not an SNP issue it is an issue for Scotland and whoever saves one job should be congratulated for their efforts.

Pathetic to read the usual embarassing and abusive posts from the ususl nauseating unionists.

21

Active Sassenach,

Luton, England 23/09/2008 08:07:01
#19,Yok Finney - decent post. We should return to the mutual traditions of member/customer owned and controlled personal saving and borrowing institutions. It would stabilise our commitment to sound banking and improve its results. I hope you have good building society accounts.

Business investment is inherently more adventurous and larger in scale than personal savings alone can fund. It was disappointing to hear Alistair Darling, with his unassuming, profound upbringing in Scottish values at the Labour Party conference. He made no plan to involve Industrial and Provident Societies in economic renewal with proper stewardship. He just wanted to tinker with what we have now and modify the dash for cash leading to crash for cash as in the case of HBOS.

As for Hornby, I am pleased to see that two enquiries into his crimes are in hand. Let neither be a whitewash and let the cages at Peterhead contain him.
22

Rufus T. Firefly,

23/09/2008 08:14:12
#25 sm753 your posting is spot on. It saves me responding to the 5 points.

I must say that point 2 was an absolute beaut.

"He (Salmond) expresses his personal view that he is against it"

That will have Sir Victor Blank quaking in his shoes (or laughing up his sleeve - you decide).
23

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 08:18:26
We shall see how successful Alex Salmond is in his attempts to ensure that the new company has its HQ in Scotland. However he is hardly negotiating from a position of strength. He wishes to have a referendum on independence in 2010. Should this return the yes vote he wishes there will have to be complex negotiations on setting up Scottish tax structure (both personal and corporate), Scottish national insurance for employees, Scottish business regulations and Scottish financial regulations. This must all take time with ensuing uncertainty over the outcome.

He also wishes thet Scotland join the Euro. So he is, in effect, asking the board of LLoyds TSB to set up HQ in a country where they don't know what the tax and regulation structure will be. He is also asking them to accept splitting up their UK operations into two separate operations under different tax structures, different regulations and different currencies. This can be done but I doubt if the board of LLoyds TSB relish the prospect.
24

Rufus T. Firefly,

23/09/2008 08:18:59
Looks like all the banking shares are taking a further dive. The credit crunch still has a long way to run. Maybe its time for salmond to shut up. If it was not for Lloyds, Hbos would likely go bust.
25

The Former Mr. Angry,

Perth 23/09/2008 08:20:06
Strange how people like Hornby are always "convinced they have done the right thing". First of all it isn't "done" yet, as the shareholders (remember them) still have to vote on the decision. Secondly how can someone who has plunged the bank into peril by taking on so much bad business claim her has done anything right?

What may be the right thing is right by him and for his rewards for capitulating HBoS' position in the face of predatory acquisition intentions by Lloyds TSB and collusion in what looks like some very murky dealings with HM Gov and His Gordonness. There is a lot to be uncovered here before anyone like Hornby starts congratulating themselves and ordinary shareholders, account holders and anyone with an interest in jobs in Scotland and the retention of a major financial instution's presence have a major interest in finding out.

Assuming the deal goes through it's fairly certain that the centre of power aspects have already been carved up and it may be politically useful to protest but I would put money on it that the centre will be London. This may also suit Brown's scorched earth policy although you can imagine what it will do further to his propects of being around any length of time.

26

Nevsky,

Moscow 23/09/2008 08:35:16
Rufus and SM#

You both seem to have an almost fanatical hatred of Salmond. Could you tell us if you agree with him bringing together the whole business community and all political parties to try and stave off job losses?

SM: Could you point out a atatement where Salmond mentions big bad England as you have quite clearly stated or are you just a liar?

27

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 08:36:02
25

1.You dont have to verbally express yourself to emphisis everything do you lets face it you have emphisised your point without opening yer mouth idiot boy.

3. No we havent. All you have established with this point is your own personal belief or more accuratly what you want to believe nothing more.

4. As helpless as every other independent nation on the planet eh? as helpless as Ireland to look after their national institutes from a UK government looking to sell them off eh?

5. Yes in colusion with the UK government and Lloyds.

27
And Rufus stop posting to yourself its almost insane.
28

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 08:37:45
33

I think the fact that he is a liar has been well and truly established that is no longer in question.
The only real question is how many logons is he responsible for lying under?
29

Mikey,

23/09/2008 08:38:40
Why oh why are the unionists so abusive about Salmond? The catalogue of abusivenames remind me of when I was about eight years old in the school playground! Kinda puts unionism in it's place, doesn't it? Absolutely devoid of policies and ideas, they sink to personal abuse!
30

Boy Wonder,

23/09/2008 08:38:50
Hornby has at least 2 million reasons for beleiving he did the right thing.

Shame the workers and clients don't!
31

Nevsky,

Moscow 23/09/2008 08:39:53
34 super#

Try and ignore Rufus he is the most detestable poster on any forum i have come across with almost nothing to contribute.

He is also a creep and used to be up AM2's posterior but will creep to every unionist poster as witnessed again today..you will notice not 1 (even unionist) will ever reciprocate.
32

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 08:43:37
23

If he saw this comming then he would have been in collusion with the UK government who are looking more and more like they did.
33

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 08:46:17
38

Rufus is just the same troll posting as sm, ugly, truly english, spectator, royster etc etc etc etc etc etc. At least they give you the opertunity to get yer point across even if they dont give a sh*t what you write.
34

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 08:47:47
36 Mikey
I agree that the abuse (as opposed to reasonable questionning of policy/rhetoric) is distasteful.

However I do not think that the abuse levelled at Alex Salmond on these threads is significantly worse than that levelled at Gordon Brown or previously Wendy Alexander (or indeed myself on occassions).
35

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 08:50:30
40 suchaparcelofrogues
Not true. Rufus (whoever he is) is a different individual. Why do you persist with these accusations?
36

Nevsky,

Moscow 23/09/2008 08:57:21
43 sm75#

Salmond has made no such inferrence regardless of who stated it, he is much too astute for that kind or rubbish apart from the fact it is not true.

Still waiting for an answer as to whether or not you think Salmond is doing what he can in bringing everyone together to try and save jobs.

Your hatred of Salmond exceeds any kind of relationship to events and i think you should take a more balanced view. If you want to criticise fair enough but as even senior Labour fugures concede he is governing well it just seems the only thing that mtivated you and Rufus is hatred with little attention to facts..try and balance it up a bit!
37

Nevsky,

Moscow 23/09/2008 08:59:23
43 sm#

Apart from anything else it's not interesting to read and offers little in the way of any kind of debate other than abuse and counter abuse...not a very intelligent way to conduct a debate on views you might have really.
38

JamesMc,

23/09/2008 09:02:03
2 quotes that I think the dunderheid unionists on this page should think about:

Spowart:
"It is vital that we do something positive. We can't just sit back and watch the Bank of Scotland disappear."

Salmond:
"No country can insulate itself from mergers and takeovers, but very few countries would so idly stand by and allow their oldest, key financial institution to be left in the position that HBOS was left in last week,"

This is about trying to save a key Scottish institution, shame on you (Rufus, etc..) for not even giving that your support.

Hornby gets 2 million and post on the Board of Lloyds. Any CEO with integrity would not accept it.
39

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 09:02:55
43

"SM: Could you point out a atatement where Salmond mentions big bad England as you have quite clearly stated or are you just a liar?"

I was quoting SuchaboxofSpanners at 20.

Really can you point to my quote "big bad England"?
maybe even cut and paste it from my post at 20?
I will settle for bad England or big England or even just England.


40

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 09:05:30
45

True but thats all yer going to get on these blogs simply because they have nothing to put up for honest debate. They have the official party political line or anti SNP rhetoric nothing else to offer.
41

Brodric,

23/09/2008 09:05:58
Threads 1 and 2 (Charles and Joe Kerr) - agree with you both.

How can we trust a man who mismanaged, snuck behind the shareholders backs and makes sure his back is covered - and his wallet.

Off with his head!
42

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 09:08:36
48

I havent claimed he "said it" numbnuts my claim is he has emphisised it. Lets face it the fact we are on here arguing about it EMPHISISES IT EVEN MORE and the more you go on about it the more it will be EMPHISISED.
Idiot boy.
43

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 09:13:39
42

Because I personally believe them to be true and so do quite a few others.
44

Alastair the First,

23/09/2008 09:13:55
I see the poll on whether or not HBOS would have been saved in an independent Scotland has been nobbled... Just like that previous poll about who would make the best first minister, where a 90% margin for Alex Salmond overnight became a lead for wee Joke.
45

Sedov,

Scotland 23/09/2008 09:14:31
The credibility of senior bankers like Hornby are rightly being questioned - who can we now trust? In 2002 Alan Greenspan ex Chairman of the US Federal Reserve said that the US economy was safe because risk (credit) had been cleverly spread through the use of complex derivative instruments. We are all paying for the greed of capitalism The system is rotten to the core.
46

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 09:15:00
53

What do you expect from a unionist controlled poll?
47

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 09:15:36
54

Couldnt agree more.
48

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 09:16:04
51 suchaparcelofrogues
Does calling somebody "numbnuts" constitute "honest debate"
49

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 09:18:09
57

It does if the shoe fits. I know my nuts would go numb if I sat in front of a PC all day and night.
50

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 09:19:39
58

The competition legislation was waved aside just for this measure which is why there are so many suspicions and questions to be answered.
51

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 09:23:23
54 sedov
The use of derivatives and short selling became common after 1999/2000 when the markets crashed on the back of the collapse of the dot.com/high tech bubble. These techniques were seen as a hedge against falling asset values and thus a method of ensuring the spread of risk (as Alan Greenspan said)

As always with these matters it is easy to be wise after the event. The Fed in the US also reduced interest rates markedly after 9/11 as yhey were worried that the effect of this would be to put the US economy into recession. As it turned out, they relaxed monetary policy too much with the sonsequent current credit problems but, as I said, hindsight etc.
52

Alan B,

23/09/2008 09:32:33
#sm753

I think it is about fear for the future of the Scottish economy.

Lets face it Scotland has not done particularly well economically over the last 30yrs atleast. Our growth rates have been both poor absolutely and relatively compared to both the rest of the uk which has itself been outperformed by a considerable margin by many small european countries. (over the last decade scottish growth 2.2%, uk 2.8% and group of small european countries known as the arc of properity 3.6%).

Most Nats put that down to the failings of the union to address our economic problems while some unionist try to explain our poor economic performance as an inevitable consequence of industrial decline.

The problem is if the financial sector in scotland fails to grow and goes into decline, failing to be the core industry we need, are we going to suffer poor economic performance for the next 30yrs?
53

Nevsky,

Moscow 23/09/2008 09:38:58
sm753#

If Edinburgh is as stated the 5th largest financial market in Europe it would seem sensible that it could therefore attract a fifth of the market to trade there if there was an exchange.

I am not even sure what the point is in the LSE as opposed to other exchanges, trading is done electronically and internationally as far as i was aware and was there not speculation of the stock exchange being bought a year or two ago by the German exchange?
54

Ugly George,

edinburgh 23/09/2008 09:42:03
66 Alan B
Even if HBOS becomes part of Lloyds TSB there is no reason why the financial services industry should fail to grow. Much, if not the majority, of the trading done in london is actually carried out be overseas banks - Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Chase Manhattan, JP Morgan etc. There are subsidiaries of French companies (Allianz etc.) and many others.The major UK merchant banks (asopposed to retail banks) have either gone bust (eg Barings) or have been taken over.
55

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 09:43:37
68 Alan B
Sorry - that should read - no reason why the financial services indstry in Scotland should fail to grow.
56

JamesMc,

Asia 23/09/2008 09:45:39
SM753: Good arguement however I disagree that its purely a consequence of the Union that put Scottish Banks on the level they are on....as does the former Chief Exec of RBS who is a strong supporter of Scottish independence.

There are other countries with small nations with global banks or key financial centres: Switzerland, Luxembourg....sure you can argue about structures that these places operate under, point is though, they are not disadvantaged by their size - they made it work for them. Unfortunately I think your comment on the Union allowing the companies to outgrow Scotland just gets back to the usual mantra of "we're just no smart enough to do it oorselves"
57

Baillie Guthrie,

Caithness 23/09/2008 09:45:54
well if RBS hadn't spent so much money on AMRO, they could have swallowed up HBOS. Lloyds played a better game and now Barclays is eating up Lehmanns.

Give the English their due - they are wily operators.

58

Calum10,

23/09/2008 09:50:10
HBOS have already lost thousands of customers to the Royal Bank over the past few days.

RBOS are expecting thousands more in the next few weeks, and are actively pursuing disgruntled HBOS depositers.

The removal of £millions of deposits from HBOS to RBOS will be in effect be a run on HBOS. That will create more uncertainty.

If you are a HBOS customer then getting your money out, and soon, would be the smartest move.
59

Alan B,

23/09/2008 09:51:54
#Ugly George

I am not saying it will not necessarily grow. However that is the fear.

The financial sector has done quite well but it could easily go into decline. We saw that with the electronics industry.

The question is how to run a small regional economy like Scotland within the global market place.

In the financial sector in particular how can we attract jobs from the city. How can we attract more head offices to Scotland. Should we have a more protective take over policy? What economic model is best for Scotland for the next 30yrs? What can we learn from the other european countries on how to run an economy?

60

Koffindodger,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 09:52:34
Perhaps he did the right thing in aggreeing to let the bank be "saved", but he didn't do the right thing by continuing Crosby's strategies after the baton was passed to him.
61

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 09:53:43
67 Nevsky
I don't think it is as simple as that. A stock exchange depends on membership of it and the number of market makers who set the buy/sell price and the availabilty of shares to buy/sell. A separate exchange in Edinburgh would probably be feasible for large companies which are traded frequently but smaller companies tend to have a limited number of market makers who trade the stock and often have a limited number of shares available for trading.

If a separate Edinburgh exchange tried to deal in these smaller companies there may be a problem of accessibility leading to a big spread between the buy/sell price thus making the market uncompeteive.
62

Alan B,

23/09/2008 09:54:52
#JamesMc

His argument also overlooks we are in a single european market place. Just look at the Spanish bank (Santander) buying up banks in the UK.
63

Alan B,

23/09/2008 09:57:16
#75 Ugly George

Would be far better to have a takeover of LSE by say RBS and move its headquarters to Edinburgh. A scandanavian consortium almost put a bid together a few yrs ago. LSE did not actually seem that expensive :)

64

JamesMc,

Asia 23/09/2008 09:57:56
71 Baille: It was Bob Diamond, an American, who called the shots on Lehmans..and dont forget, Japanese Nomura will be ending up with a big portion, as well as Japanese Mitsubishi buying 20% of Morgan Stanley. There is nothing wily about Barclays. The only wily thing about this is that Hornby, Brown, Darling & Lloyds new about it long before telling the market or shareholders or employees. Its so wily that its criminal
65

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 09:58:36
73 Alan B
Having a protective takeover policy is hardly conducive to attracting global players. It gives the impression (real or imagined) that companies are restricted in what they can do.
66

The Strategist,

23/09/2008 09:59:21
Save it? Why do we want to save it? It's no use to us. We need a bank that thinks strategically and invests in Scotland. Let it die and lets start another one.
67

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

23/09/2008 09:59:52
Take a level-headed look at the options that were available.

Option 1 - do nothing and let HBOS collapse. Letting the UK's fifth biggest bank and largest mortgage lender go out of business was never ever going to be a real option.

Option 2 - nationalise HBOS. Some comparisons with Northern Rock have been made here but it should be recognised that the route the government took was the last resort option. Although Northern Rock had a bid on the table from Virgin Money it would have meant further financial sweeteners from taxpayers' monies with no guarantee of any taxpayers' monies being repaid. Virgin's offer for Northern Rock makes LTSB's offer for HBOS look exceedingly generous. If no acceptable buyer for HBOS had been available then perhaps this route would have been examined. But the sheer scale of HBOS's cash shortfall - some £200 billion - would have made this extremely difficult.

Option 3 - get RSB or Scottish financiers to purchase the BOS arm of HBOS. Or the let's look after our ain option and sod Halifax. Ignoring the whole issue of the demerging the two business the truth is that there was not another alternative buyer to LTSB. RSB is up to its neck in liabilities as much as HBOS. Moreover it is just about coping with its merger with Nat West - another merger would be one too far at this stage. As for the financiers - just cannot see it happening. In fact of the names mooted some are the very people who caused these problems in the first place.

Option 4 - LTSB merges with HBOS. From a purely financial point of view this was a more attractive option. LTSB had been a lot more prudent in its activities and is relatively cash rich compared to HBOS so the liabilities of HBOS are no longer as threatening. The downside is clearly the possibility of job losses in the new merged business. However, having some jobs is clearly better than no jobs at all under option 1.

In an ideal world with a limitless pot of cash then option 2 would ha
68

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

23/09/2008 10:00:25
#83 (continued)

In an ideal world with a limitless pot of cash then option 2 would have been desirable. But we are in the real world where there is not a limitless pot of cash. Option 4 it seems to me was the only feasible option on the table. It may not be desirable but it is in my opinion the best of a bad bunch of choices.

I know that some here may argue that there was an option 5 - to allow the Bank of England to let HBOS have access to the necessary credit (at commercial bank rates). That option too I feel is flawed. Firstly, HBOS already had the option of going to the Bank of England to use a credit facility - but decided not to do so (why is another matter but that's a complete different line of debate). If it was not willing to use the existing credit facility why would it decide to use a new credit facility? Secondly, if the Bank of England did take this route then surely other commercial banks would have cried foul and asked them for the same facility. That would have had all sorts of implications and is a decision that should not be taken quickly - HBOS on the other hand needed a quick fix to the immediate problem.

One should recognise that things are not set in stone. There is still scope for some sort of planned demerger in the future once credit markets and the general economic situation improve. It would not surprise me if that point the FSA asks LTSB to divest some of its interests - perhaps divesting the BOS part of the business would be a good start. But that cannot happen until the fundamental problems of the economy are tackled.
69

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 10:04:45
78 Alan B
Several groups have considered and even attempted to takeover the LSE but I don't think that any of them have considered moving it out of London.

As you said, in terms of these industries, it is not expensive but I don't think RBS or any bank could buy a stock exchange. An exchange has to be independent of the companies which are traded. You can hardly have shares in RBS traded by a company taht it owns - this could lead to all kinds of conflicting interests and accustaions of insider dealing, manipulation etc.
70

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 10:06:57
78 AlanB
Oops - I've made an error I forgot that you can buy shares in LSE on the LSE so the position is not quite as I said. However I am sure that there are restrictions to prevent the problems I mentioned.
71

Nevsky,

Moscow 23/09/2008 10:07:12
85 sm#

But not irrelevant for the payment of corporate tax which in an independent Scotland would not be paid to Edinburgh but London. HBOS paid £1.6 billion in tax last year.
72

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

23/09/2008 10:08:50
#72 I've never forgiven RBS for their part in the student loans scheme - they will never get my money.
73

Alan B,

23/09/2008 10:10:21
#81 Ugly George

I am just raising the questions that need to be addressed. Reasons for considering a more restrictive takeover policy:

- many other european countries do not follow the uk laisse laffe model for takeovers.
- the Scottish economy by it nature will have smaller companies than England and we are in the poor situation of these companies then being taken over and headquarters move out.
- takeovers in economic terms seldom actually improve value for shareholders. It keeps a circulation of economic activity etc but does little to improve the competitiveness of the market place in many cases.
- takeover lead to short termism and companies taking poison pills etc to prevent takeovers.
- takeover go against orgainic growth and generally reduce competition. Is not better to presue (perfect competition economic model) with low barrier to entry to the market than simply allow takeovers particularly ones that mgt do not want.
- is it really beneficial for Scottish power to be foreign owned.
- would it now be better to have scottish airports owned within scotland.
- there is a difference from growing and protecting scottish companies (protecting them from takeovers not competition) and attacting say emea headquarters of global companies which a more protective takeover policy would be irrelevent.

In summary i think we should be atleast debating and discussing these issues. Part of the problem with the union as I see it is, it means we do not seem to discuss what is best for Scotland. The unionist parties are scared to offer and discuss alternative economic models and stategies for Scotland incase it undermines their political objectives.

74

Deucharman,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 10:12:50
#67 "If Edinburgh is as stated the 5th largest financial market in Europe it would seem sensible that it could therefore attract a fifth of the market to trade there if there was an exchange."

By that logic the largest would have all of the market, the second would have half, the third would have a third, and the fourth a quarter, let alone the fifth having a fifth!

Hey, that adds up to more than twice the size of the market - has Nevsky discovered the answer, or does he/she simply have no concept of maths?
75

Alan B,

23/09/2008 10:15:01
#Ugly George

re LSE

I was not being truely serious, but it has cross my mind. Just pondering the question.
76

Alan B,

23/09/2008 10:20:57
I do not really think it is about Scotland having its own exchange. But more how can we attract more of the jobs from the city to Scotland.

Everything is electronic now a days and physical location is not nearly as important. What we need to do is niche ourselves in a way to attract substantially more of the business away from London.
77

JamesMc,

23/09/2008 10:23:31
83: I think the overall point being debated here though is the circumstances of short-selling, timing of announcement and general deception/fraud by Hornby. It should be investigated in the same way as in the US.

Personally I still favour option 3 from the Scottish Financiers to take out BOS.
78

Alan B,

23/09/2008 10:24:54
Fiscal autonomy and then abolish stamp duty on share transfers, together with a cut in corporation tax to compete with Ireland.
79

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 10:25:36
88 Nevsky
Companies pay corporation tax on their operations in whichever country they operate. The do not pay it all to the country with the HQ

If Scotland were independent then HBOS would pay corporation tax on its Scottish operations to the Scottish govt and corporation tax on its other UK operations to the Westminster govt.
80

Alan B,

23/09/2008 10:28:43
#99 Ugly George

"If Scotland were independent then HBOS would pay corporation tax on its Scottish operations to the Scottish govt and corporation tax on its other UK operations to the Westminster govt."

It is not as simple as that. Companies manage their tax arrangements in a way that means that it can depend on say what one cost centre in a business charges another. Where a headoffice is based can have an effect but so does the tax regime of a country.

81

McMillar,

Fife 23/09/2008 10:28:44
Great deal Andy...you'll go far.
82

Jolly,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 10:30:33
Until recently all Scottish banks were owned by outside interests:

RBS - formerly owned by Nat West
Bank of Scotland - owned by Barclays
Clydesdale - owned by various, mainly
overseas(Australia, HongKong/Shanghai)

Now, it suddenly matters??????????????????
83

Nevsky,

Moscow 23/09/2008 10:30:56
99 George#


So BP is not paying one penny in tax on it's interests outside of the UK, right?
84

Alan B,

23/09/2008 10:34:47
#Fed "Secondly, if the Bank of England did take this route then surely other commercial banks would have cried foul and asked them for the same facility"

Do no think there would be any problem with extending the facility to all uk banks as long as the it was on commerical terms. All you would have is the BOE backing up the dried up credit market.

Putting the 100 billion liquidity in before the bail out and putting some temp regualtion or ban on short selling (as now done) beforehand could have stopped the problem.

I think their now is a suspicion that HBOS and Llyods have used this as an excuse to merge breaking the competition rules. Even from a uk perspective having one bank owning 30% of the mortgage market is too monopolistic and not a good idea.

85

Alan B,

23/09/2008 10:36:46
#Jolly

"RBS - formerly owned by Nat West"

Wrong. RBS tookover Natwest.

"Bank of Scotland - owned by Barclays"

Wrong. BOS merged with Halifax. But Halifax was the dominant partner. The agreement meant Halifax mgt took over but the commercial headquarters stayed in Edinburgh.
86

Grumpy,

23/09/2008 10:40:02
(103) - Bank of Scotland was NEVER owned by Barclays.
87

shivago8,

livingston 23/09/2008 10:42:02
I have been with them for a long time.

But not for much longer.

Current a/c,s savings,both mine and the grand bairns are moving out.

Disgraceful that in this day and age you cant rely on your bank.

I have lost a helluva lot of money with the shares.

Now read with the merger that I will get 83 shares to the 100,getting stuffed again.

The only winners are the fat cats at the top.

How can you pay the leaders telephone number pay rises when they cocked up.

The Germans dont go near the banks,dont trust them,demand wages monthly in their hands.

My banking system is about to be [UNDER THE MATTRESS]
88

Marga,

Fife 23/09/2008 10:56:23
83 Federalist,

In your options, you ignore the important fact that there was not a level playing field. Other banks (e.g. Santander owner of Abbey) did not express an interest because they *knew* that competition rules made it impossible. How were they to know that the government would change the law to accommodate their bid, this favoured bid only? I understand that this knowledge was not available to the market.

Also in all this, the fact that only UK interests were considered and UK ministers involved, with no consultations with other levels of government, as if the Scottish government did not exist, is unacceptable. Halifax, for example, is represented by the UK government (it has no other), but Edinburgh has its own government in Scotland. I believe that even to this day, the UK government has not called on the Scottish government to discuss the issue. However, Brown is flying to America to consult. I personally as a Scot find that outrageous.
89

Ugly George,

edinburgh 23/09/2008 10:59:37
100 Alan B
Yes that is true but the accounts have to be audited and the revenue in the respective countries will scrutinise these operations closely - particularly for large companies paying large amounts.
There may be an amount of manipulation but any significant manipulation that demonstrates that a company is deliberately distorting its accounts towards a country with lower CT could result in prosecution for tax evasion.

If HBOS, which does the majority of its business in the rest of the UK produced accounts which show that most of its profits were generated in Scotland, then scrutiny and investigation would no doubt ensue.
90

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 11:06:38
64

And is this you "EMPHISISING" the benefits of Scotland being within the union without actually "STATING" it?
91

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 11:08:47
85

Ah which is why all the companies based in London float there shares on the NYSE or is it Tokyo? no maybe its DAX?
92

Patrick O'Reilly,

Coatbridge 23/09/2008 11:08:54
HBOS 1 Salmond 0.
93

Alan B,

23/09/2008 11:10:42
#Ugly George

I do not believe you are correct. I am not talking about evasion but tax management.

If that were true then why are certain companies relocating outside the UK for tax reasons?

Another example. If a small scottish business sells services to an company based in ireland where does it pay corporation taxes. The revenue is generated in Ireland by a Scottish based company. My understanding is taxes are paid in scotland.

If I was to buy something online the company would not pay tax in Scotland or the UK. eg tesco CD can be bought avoid VAT. Where would tesco pay the corporation tax. Where are taxes paid on internet betting etc.

As such when I bought a mortgage it was over the phone. Would any associated profit be based in Scotland or the location of the mortage company?

94

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 11:13:28
95

Which makes the UK such a tax haven for business eh? and how competative will England be relative to an Independent Scotland for business tax when Scotland will be able to keep her tax levels relatively lower with an oil fund?
We already pay less in council tax than England does and thats without independence all we needed was to elect a "Scottish national party".
95

Alan B,

23/09/2008 11:16:21
#suchaparcelofrogues

"We already pay less in council tax than England does"

Am sceptical about that. Scotland always seemed to have considerably higher council tax than England. Scotland definately seemed to have higher council tax than London from my own personal experience.
96

Marga,

Fife 23/09/2008 11:16:29
113 Ugly George,

You seem to have a touching belief in the good faith of this government, which is currently under suspicion of changing the goalposts during the game (see HBOS takeover) and/or taking advantage of placemen in or institutional weakness of supposedly neutral regulating bodies (see Electoral Commission).
97

Fairfax,

23/09/2008 11:17:29
Marga (112): "Other banks (e.g. Santander owner of Abbey) did not express an interest because they *knew* that competition rules made it impossible."

They certainly knew that competition rules made it unlikely, but they must also have suspected that governments facing financial disaster are willing to negotiate. However, there is nothing to stop these banks making an offer now, since HBOS shareholders have yet to vote. In particular, given the share-for-share deal negotiated by Lloyds, HBOS would almost certainly be receptive to better offers, if any were to appear.

"Also in all this, the fact that only UK interests were considered and UK ministers involved, with no consultations with other levels of government, as if the Scottish government did not exist, is unacceptable."

It probably was impolitic, certainly, particularly since this will further damage Labour in Scotland. However, the most common remark I hear from Lloyds quants and traders is the belief that (i) it's too much of a risk given HBOS' £100 billion credit crunch debt, and (ii) the political risks in Scotland make it ever more undesirable. If that is reflected at higher echelons within LTSB, then the offer might be withdrawn in any case.
98

Alan B,

23/09/2008 11:19:50
#Ugly George

Another example i forgot. Jersey set itself up as a tax haven for non resident companies. ie a non resident company would pay if i remember correctly £950 flat rate corporation tax. Why would they do so if it did not matter where the tax centre was?
99

The Strategist,

23/09/2008 11:20:24
1% annual windfall tax on all financial services companies to be put into a nationally owned venture capital organisation to invest in new high tech sectors especially energy.
100

Alan B,

23/09/2008 11:21:54
#Fairfax

There is no chance this offer wil be withdrawn (unless the Uk government do a uturn and put restrictions on the merger).
101

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 11:26:26
32

Because its not in trouble.

111

"For the second time, identify where I have "lied"


"Nevsky

"SM: Could you point out a atatement where Salmond mentions big bad England as you have quite clearly stated or are you just a liar?"

I was quoting SuchaboxofSpanners at 20."

And then there is yer wee gem at 65.

"It is technically and logically impossible to EMPHASISE something if one has not, previously or concurrently, STATED it (whether verbally, in writing, semaphore, sign language, whatever)"

And thats without even making an effort.
102

Alan B,

23/09/2008 11:27:08
#Lara

"Where have you lied?

Here, for example: "Suppose Scotland were "independent" last week. What could Salmond have done to affect the HBOS situation? You know the answer - nothing"

You presume to know the answer to a question which is purely hypothetical and which, therefore, cannot be truthfully anwered."

I have to say I think you are stretching things to call that a lie. It is an opinion you can agree or disagree with.
103

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 11:27:51
119

Not mine.
104

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 11:31:25
121

"They certainly knew that competition rules made it unlikely, but they must also have suspected that governments facing financial disaster are willing to negotiate."

Funnily enough LLoyds wasnt put off though eh by the "unlikely" what did they know the others didnt?
105

Ugly George,

edinburgh 23/09/2008 11:31:36
117 Alan B
It appears that what you are saying is that the HQ of a company can charge the other parts of the company in other countries for head office services. Yes that is true but that is what I am saying - the country with the HQ has the HQ operation located there and so has one of its operations there. But what proportion of a companies revenue can be allocated in this manner. If a company produced accounts that showed that an inordinate amount was being charged by HQ services then questions will be asked.
106

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 11:32:34
128

How about my post at 127 nae porkies shown in there then?
107

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 11:37:58
122 Alan B
I am not saying that it does not matter where a tax centre is. Obviously it does and that is why, as you said, companies relocate there. What I am saying is that if you operate in a business in a country you have to pay corporation tax in the country in which you operate even if it has an HQ elsewhere. The original point I was making is that the HBOS 1.6bn corporation tax bill would not go solely to the Scottish govt just because HBOS has its HQ in Edinburgh.
108

Alan B,

23/09/2008 11:40:17
#131 Ugly George

That is one aspect. Not just head office functions any cost centre functions, could be customer service functions, billing, sales, production, value added services, marketing etc.

But I am also suggesting more than that. Why have certain UK companies based themselves in Amsterdam (tax breaks). Why are some companies recently talked of or move out the UK?

Do you know the answer to the questions i raised about where corporation taxes would be paid on services produced and sold by say a uk centre to another EU country. My example was a small scottish company selling services to a company in Ireland without being located there.

One of the reasons the left in europe want the EU to coordinate corporation tax is to stop tax competition that drives down business taxes and tax breaks.
109

Alan B,

23/09/2008 11:42:24
#133 Ugly George

Not disagreeing. Do not even know if it matter where the head quarters really is but the tax centre.
110

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 11:43:17
120 Marga
I was not referring to the govt. I was referring to the Inland Revenue.
111

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 11:43:17
120 Marga
I was not referring to the govt. I was referring to the Inland Revenue.
112

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 11:45:36
133

No you may have to pay A tax but that wont exempt you from paying your due corporation tax to the country your based in.
That tax you pay for operating in another country can be called anything and be set at any rate the country chooses to charge. Basically its an operating charge or profit charge.
e.g all oil and gas companies operating in Algeria pay the Algerian govt 50% of all profits but are still due corporation tax in the countries they are based in.
113

Fairfax,

23/09/2008 11:48:12
Alan B (124): "There is no chance this offer wil be withdrawn (unless the Uk government do a uturn and put restrictions on the merger)."

Lloyds shareholders may not share that view, particularly given HBOS debt. Further, given the behaviour of banking shares today, I would not be surprised if the Board of LTSB decide to err on the side of prudence.
114

Doh,

23/09/2008 11:52:31

There can be little doubt that Andy Hornby is completely our of his depth. It does make me question where "high-flyers" at the age of 37 should be appointed to be CEO of a bank.

The whole episode doesnt say much for the quality of the HBOS board.

It is interesting that bankers bonuses are awarded annually and not over the economic cycle.

Get rich quick, make a hash of it, then get out.
Crazy.
115

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 11:58:57
134 Alan B
I don't know if I have all the answers but I may have some.
The recent move of United News and Media and Shire Pharmaceuticals is closely linked to what we were talking about. Alastair Darling had changed the rules so that UK companies could be taxed on profits made overseas. A crazy move on which he has had to backtrack.

Companies have set up in the Netherlands as I think they have a rule that says a company setting up there pays no (or very little) corporation tax for the first few years. That is why U2 and The Rolling Stones are now companies registered in the Netherlands.

As far as a UK centre selling a product to another EU country, that is a sale or export on which the seller make a profit (presumably) and so is liable to corporation tax. To the recipient of the product this will therefore be a cost in the accounts thus reducing profits and hence CT to the respective country.

I agreet that companies will locate or relocate operations to other areas where tax is lower and I have never disputed that. I don't know why you feel that I have.
116

Alan B,

23/09/2008 11:59:54
#Fairfax

Do Llyods shareholders get a say? Being a takeover will it not just be HBOS shareholders. LLoyds board have made there decision. Any change now would make them look like numpties.
117

Alan B,

23/09/2008 12:05:29
#Ugly George

Not really disputing with you rather than discussing the issue. It is integral to the argument for fiscal autonomy.
118

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 12:12:18
142 Alan B
Presumably Llods TSB shareholders can do something about it at the next AGM (round about May I think) if that is not too late.

Alternatively they could call an EGM and pass a motion calling on the board to withdraw its planned takeover.
119

Fairfax,

23/09/2008 12:12:22
Alan B (142):"Do Llyods shareholders get a say? Being a takeover will it not just be HBOS shareholders."

I don't think there's a requirement for all LTSB shareholders to vote, but a big deal like this cannot proceed if primary shareholders disagree.

"LLoyds board have made there decision. Any change now would make them look like numpties."

In normal times, I would agee. In the current climate, who cares?
120

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 12:20:07
141

Companies cant just keep on relocating because countries change their tax rates if that were the case companies would be permanantly on the move which is expensive time consuming and hard on the staff.
You cant take your staff from country to country or employ new staff at the same level as your existing trained staff wherever you go.
That there are tax exiles is not disputed but you cant compare individual or bands like U2 with companies who employ hundreds if not thousands of staff.

121

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 12:24:28
143 Alan B
As far as fiscal autonomy and corporation tax etc. are concerned - a few points

In common with Sarkozy in France and Angela Merkel in Germany, the Tories have an official policy to reduce corportaion tax and have described how they are going to fund it.

The SNP say they would reduce corporation tax but have not said how they would fund it in the initial stage apart from(presumably) oil revenues but who knows what oil revenues will be in 4/5 years time.

Setting up fiscal autonomy for corporation tax will require all compasnies who trade in both Scotland and the rest of the UK to split up their operations with two separate sets of accounts.

This would be beneficial to them if they were to receive a significant reduction in CT. However if it merely forces them to go through a complex admin restucturing for a CT rate which is comparable to that set by the Tories at Westminster, they would, no doubt, feel that this is a burden they could do without.

If CT rates are comparable, a small UK company which is seeking to expand in a relatively small way into Scotland may be put off by having such an extra burden
122

Alan B,

23/09/2008 12:28:05
#suchaparcelofrogues

But look at online gambling. It is based in location where no betting duty is taxed even though the customer base is in the uk.

You can buy CDs from Tesco (jersey i think) avoiding VAT. I would assume the corporation tax will be paid in that location too.

Where would tax on profit of a mortgage be paid location of mortgage holder or location of financial institution?
123

Alan B,

23/09/2008 12:31:38
#147 Ugly George

Lower corporation taxes 12.5% in Ireland has probably been the most important factor in its unbelievable growth rate.

(although ireland has made the same mistake a the uk in allowing personal debt to get to silly levels.)
124

Grahamski,

23/09/2008 12:35:07
126
Lara,
Of course you fail to see what makes Mr Salmond a charlatan, you're a SNP cheerleader. The rest of us are beginning to see through him. His loud-mouthed attack on 'spivs' has been universally trashed by experts in the field as simplistic claptrap (does this sound familiar?).
Indeed in his indecent haste to get a kick in at the English he inadvertantly kicked his chief economic adviser up the bahookey! Ouch that's gotta hurt! But as the cybernats assured us Mr Salmond didn't mean good short-term selling as done by tartan macspivs, no it is the evil bad English short-term selling that is wicked...tell me again you don't see him as a charlatan.
125

Alan B,

23/09/2008 12:37:35
#Ugly George

It is not just corporation tax it is the other small taxes.

- tax on selling shares
- tax on betting duty
- tax breaks on films, Ireland was the location for films like Rob Roy and Braveheart due to tax breaks.
-niching your tax regime depending on your economic focus
- even tax on flights- the uk introduced this to tax the cash cows of the london airports. For scotland it means that it was one factor helping to prevent the growth of more routes.
126

Alan B,

23/09/2008 12:42:36
#Grahamski

"The rest of us are beginning to see through him"

Rubbish you have slagged him and the snp from the beginning. You are a labour apologist.

"has been universally trashed by experts in the field as simplistic claptrap "

Rubbish: did you not hear the interviews with scottish experts recently. Burt for one. The founder of direct line for another. The representative of Aberdeen Asset Mgt on politics now.

Add to that has the US not just done what Salmond was calling for in putting a temporary ban on short selling. Did the clueless Brown and Darling not reject Salmonds advice to do something about short selling only to uturn and ban after the bail out of HBOS.

127

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 12:44:24
149 Alan B
Agreed - but everybody has seen the success of Ireland and there is now something of a Dutch auction in the EU of lowering corporation tax. Many of the new entrants have very low rates. As I said, France and Germany have embarked on large reductions (in the case of France - down to 15%) and a Tory govt in Westminster is not going to stand back and let the UK be put at a a disadvantage relative to the large countries in the EU . The Tories have stated this. Even Gordon Brown has agreed this.

The net result of all of this is that low rates of corporation tax are likely to be the norm in the EU in a few years time - indeed it is difficult to see how anybody will be able to maintain high rates. In this sense Scotland will not be given itself a huge advantage over other EU countries as Ireland did when it set a rate of 12.5% when most other EU countries had rates of 30 - 40%
128

Alan B,

23/09/2008 12:51:02
#153 Ugly George

I think that is why the small countries have done better than the large ones over the past 2 decades.

The small countries are nimbler to make changes and in some ways are forced to address economic realities whereas large countries are much slower at changing. Small countries tend the be able to niche themselves.

Abit like big and small companies.

Scotland need to make sure it get ahead of the game and have the power to implement such policies (whether within the uk or not).

129

Sedov,

Scotland 23/09/2008 12:51:19
62 Big George. hindsight? -No. The huge rise in using derivatives, as you rightly point out came on to the markets after 2000 when investors discovered that it was easier to make money from money than from the real economy of manufacturing, trading in goods and services etc. In fact the notional value of derivatives in the global economy is estimated ( the bankers do not realy know exactly how much) at $600 trillion. This against world production in new goods and services of $50 trillion - so it does not need an expert to predict that t
130

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 12:53:20
151 Alan B
Indeed but talking about reducing taxes is one thing. Delivering on that is another. As we have agreed in the past, Scotland needs to get away from a high public spending culture and North Sea oil production is forecast to fall by up to 10% per annum.

I agree with tax reductions but there will have to be consequent reductions in expenditure. The proposed cut in corporation tax by the SNP alone will cost nearly £1bn per annum. I know that the argument is that this stimulates the economy and leads, eventually, to more tax revenue but how will it be funded initially?
131

sweet76,

23/09/2008 12:59:48
My conclusion based on the comments made here are that the nationalists:
1. Condemn the UK Government for meddling with the internal affairs of privatly owned businesses.

2. Applaud Alex Salmond for meddling with the internal affairs of privatly owned businesses.
132

Sedov,

Scotland 23/09/2008 13:00:00
155... continued... the bubble would burst and sooner rather than later In fact the great American economist Charles Kildenberg wrote a book before he died a few years ago called Manias, panics and crashes about the tendency for bubbles to burst following the investment in what Karl Marx described as fictitious capital. The lack of trust in bankers has also been around for a long time as W.C. Fields said " I like thieves. Some of my best friends are thieves. Why, just last week we had the President of the bank over for dinner"
133

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 13:03:02
155 Sedov
Yes but that is the way markets work and have done since the Dutch tulip bulb bubble in the 18th Century. People get carried away with what appears to be successful at the time whether it is dot.com/high tech. shares in the nineties, derivatives recently or property at various times. The sensible individual can recognise the benefits of any of these at times but is not taken in by the hype.
134

Fairfax,

23/09/2008 13:03:49
Sedov (155): . "In fact the notional value of derivatives in the global economy is estimated ( the bankers do not realy know exactly how much) at $600 trillion."

That's the usual estimate given. However, derivatives are essentially insurance policies, and you have left out the fact that this is the estimated value if all of these paid out at once. In that case, it should be much greater than the yearly production of manufacturing, for example. To compare the total value of, say , 10000000 life-insurance policies might be of the order of £3 trillion. The value of the world derivatives market is worrying because the expected pay-out in financial disaster could be enormous, not because the total value is high.
135

Fairfax,

23/09/2008 13:05:06
sm273 (161): "(Cough.)

http://www.lloydstsb.com/lloydstsb_hbos_announcement.asp?link=container3"

Thanks! I really should have checked.
136

Alan B,

23/09/2008 13:11:13
#Ugly George

"Indeed but talking about reducing taxes is one thing. Delivering on that is another."

Agree. But atleast we must get politicians to agree it is a desirable course of action. For too long in Scotland we have just assumed wealth generation did not matter (particularly labour).

Couple of points to note:
1)the snp with support of the tories have reduced business rates on of the few taxes the sp can control.
2)the snp lit proposals do involved a tax cut. (lets not get into the merits of LIT i do not support it either)

You say the snp corporation tax proposals would cost 1 billion. My own view is i would have scrapped the 500 million going to Scottish enterprise. I would rather business spent and invested its own money rather than a government agency funded by this money telling business how to operate. Not slagging SE just saying i think it is better for the companies to keep their own money.

Finally. I think you are under estimating the effect tax cuts will have on generating tax revenues. Tax revenues are more effected by having a faster growth rate than specific tax rates.

I have bought into the desirability of a lower business tax environment and would accept the cut necessary to make us a successful economy. While probably an unfair analogy I would rather have lower taxes to create more jobs and better jobs than taxing people to pay social workers to tell them they are poor.

And even more finally. :) Ireland i believe had a low business tax environement. Personal taxation and vat were not. (if i remember correctly vat was higher than the UK). ie it is about a different balance of taxes rather than just lower taxation.
137

Grahamski,

Falkirk 23/09/2008 13:14:26
152
I think you'll find that most experts including Sir Peter Burt said that short-selling was part of the problem but not the overriding cause, as Mr Salmond claimed in the Scottish parliament. This is where Mr Salmond is at his most devious. Twisting facts and events to fit in with his narrow and bitter agenda.
For all his crocodile tears over saving Scottish jobs, Mr Salmond's eye is very firmly on the chance to make political capital out of this crisis. He benevolently looks on as that Foghorn Leghorn of Scottish politics, Alex Neill, elbows his way in front of the cameras to announce that he's going to save the BOS for Scotland. Buffoon.
138

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

23/09/2008 13:17:08
#148 I made the point yesterday that country's who attempt to unilaterally impose regulations risk losing businesses to offshore regimes with weaker regulation. Certainly greater co-ordination of regualtion is required - at European level a sane, sensible debate needs to be had about having a pan-European regulator. That though is unlikely to happen whilst the likes of News International have their own agendas - the decision by Darling to oppose a pan-European regulator was as much to do with appeasing Murdoch as was to supporting the City.
139

Sedov,

Scotland 23/09/2008 13:20:58
#162 Fairfax, good point but i did say "notional" value
Also, insurers always put a value of the total replacement of a house or a car when they come to value your policy and charge you accordingly and not for a part of a house or a car so they are gaining the full value as long as they do not have to pay out in full ( which is not very often, in and the same goes for derivatives. Capitalism always gains and is even at present.
140

Alan B,

23/09/2008 13:23:06
#Grahamski

Burt was scathing of labour on the tv interview on politics now. While not agreeing with everying Salmond said he was much more inline with Salmond. Burt in his obvious anger was asking the question why labour delayed the announcement of the 100billion liquidity deal till after the collapse in share prices of HBOS.

Salmond call in advance to do something about short selling was not anti london or anything else. But the opion of a profession economist in how to deal with a crisis. Different experts will have opinions. But what has happened is the US have actually done what Salmond was lobbying Brown for.

Again you seem not to have a handle on events.
"Alex Neill, elbows his way in front of the cameras to announce that he's going to save the BOS for Scotland"

The guy who started Direct Line was on tv this morning and explained he approach Alex Neil. It does seem like a good idea but looking into possibilities does not mean that it will come to fruition.

Seriously Brown and Darling have been clueless. Did you hear the interview with Darling on Sunday? Labour have mishandled and been behind the curve on too many of the financial issues.
141

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 13:24:02
153 Alan B
Agree up to a point that smaller EU countries have been more successful recently (Portugal and Greece haven't) but this trend is only visible in the EU. If you look at other parts of the world the trend is the other way. In Central/South America the bigger countries, Brazil, Argentina, Mexico tend to have much larger per capita GDP than the smaller nations. This is not a hard and fast rule but the correlation is clear. Canada has lower per capita GDP than US and New Zealand much lower than Australia. The nimbleness of the smaller countries does not seem to be an advantage there - particularly when they share a common language.

There is also the fact that the big European countries have woken up to the problem as demonstrated by France and Germany particularly now that they are faced with a host of small countries competing with them with so many new entrants. They now realise that while it may not have been much of a problem for them with Ireland being the sole low tax European country, the situation is completely different now with the likes of Czech Republic, Slovakia etc.

We are then faced with the economy of scale issue. the smaller countries have to set up their own Foreign Offices, broadcasting operations, tax revenue organisations etc. etc. - all very costly per capita for small countries.

You raise yourself the comparison with companies. Who can sell goods more competively - Tesco or the small grocer.
142

Liberal for life,

Dunblane 23/09/2008 13:28:04
I really hate people with an attitude like Mr Hornby. Our business bank is HBOS and ultimately his recklessness could have cost a lot more than just the bank employee jobs, so who does he think he is now trying to justify his role in this fiasco.

I now believe the bank shareholders should stand firm against this takeover bid in an attempt to save the BOS bit at the 11th hour (or is this now the 13th hour)?
143

Alan B,

23/09/2008 13:30:25
#Ugly George

Portugal and Greece were the 2 poorest european countries in europe when they joined the eec and have remained so. Greece has had a socialist an very poor government for most of the last few decades apart from recently.
144

Alan B,

23/09/2008 13:33:07
#Ugly George

I am talking about in Europe as we really need to compare like with like. ie the Western world.

European countries can also take advantage of the single european market. Without the eu the argument for independence from an economic point of view would be considerably more difficult to make.
145

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 13:33:50
163

And yet there you go you managed to do it in yer post at 64 and now you have added another lie to your list.

So when a women puts on make up to "EMPHASIS" her beauty what was the original statement?
"I am beautiful"?
146

Alan B,

23/09/2008 13:37:59
#Ugly George

Why do you think the following countries have a higher gdp ppp per capita that the uk

Luxembourg, Norway, Ireland, Switzerland, Iceland, Netherlands,Austria, Denmark, Sweden, Finland , Belgium

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita
147

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 13:40:35
148

The point is about where corporation tax is paid not where other spurious various taxations are paid.
Corporation tax is paid to one sourse only you dont split your corporation tax bill. If you are paying another "business" tax then it will be based on profits or income tax on staff employed locally or brought in from abroad ie contractors.
There are many 3rd world countries who will tax companies for whatever reasons they can get away with but that wont deduct from due corporation taxation from the country the company is based in.
148

Alan B,

23/09/2008 13:42:53
#sm753

Which senior politicians would you trust and are also capable?

From me I would not trust any senior labour politician within the Scottish parliament or Wesminter. Cook would be the last labour politician i would have some faith in. Reid seemed competent (but arrogant). So think he would make a better leader than Brown or Blair but would not necessarily trust him.

From the tories I would not trust Cameron or Obourne. Cannot think that i would trust many if any of them. Goldie up here seems about the best of the union parties but there are few other tories in the sp that you would trust.

The lib dems are all over the place and seem to have sold out their ethics.
149

Alan B,

23/09/2008 13:44:27
#180 suchaparcelofrogues

I was mainly talking about corporation tax.
150

Grahamski,

Falkirk 23/09/2008 13:45:15
171
'While not agreeing with everything Mr Salmond said..' Are you for real? Mr Salmond's main argument in the Scottish Parliament was that short-term selling by spivs was the reason HBOS was taken over. That view has been trashed by almost all the experts interviewed. They all siad that short-selling played a part in this but the main reason was failures in the HBOS business model.
Mr Salmond, as he likes to get his cybernats to remind us, is a professional economist. As such He must know this so why would he concentrate on the easy and predictable target of London spivs? Because he is both devious and cynical, his are the actions of a charlatan.
Mr Neill's actions are that of a buffoon.
151

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 13:45:26
174

Because a government labels itself as socialist that doesnt make it so. New Labour label themselves as socialist and Soviet Russia and China labelled themselves and were labelled as socialist communist when in fact they were nothing more than totalitarian fascist.
Western governments label themselves as democratic instead of capitalist because it sounds better and keeps the plebs in ignorance.
152

Alan B,

23/09/2008 13:47:43
#suchaparcelofrogues

Are you saying the Greek government was not a democractic left wing government?
153

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 13:55:22
179 Alan B
I am not disputing this. What I am saying is that the theory that smaller countries perform better has only been supported by recent years in Europe. It is not supported by evidence in other parts of the world nor in other eras. Yes small European countries have taken advantage of the situation recently but, now that France and Germany (and Italy) etc have realised the problem that may not be the case from now on.

I could turn the question on its head. Why do smaller countries elsewhere in the world tend to have a lower GDP per capita compared to neighbouring larger countries with whom they share a language. There are many examples :
Canada/US, New Zealand/Australia, Paraguay/Argentina, El Salvador/Mexico etc. etc.

Why did Irelnd have a substantially lower per capita GDP than the UK for 70 years despite having the huge advantage of being neutral during WW2 - an advantage which Sweden and Switzerland used effectively. I think that my qustion is just as valid as yours. I know you have said this is about the single market in Europe but these other areas I have mentioned also have trading agreements.

PS
Cannot agree about Greece having mostly Socialist govts. The socialist part (PASOK) was only in power for a few years in the eighties. Most of the time in the EU the Conservative New Democracy has been in power apart from some periods of coalition.
154

Alan B,

23/09/2008 13:57:33
#Grahamski

You do not seem to have a handle on events or what the experts have said. Even the head of HBOS who precided over the mess has said the short selling brought matter to a head and forced the merger on HBOS.

You have completely ignored that Brown ignored Salmond advice to do something about short selling, until after the failure of HBOS. Why has Brown banned it now? Why have the US banned it?

Seriously you seem clueless.

Question why have many of the experts like Burt, the FSA and other said that HBOS was a well capitalised bank?

Everone knows the problems. The credit markets have dried up. HBOS relied on teh credit markets to finance its mortage porfolio. Short sellers see weaknesses in companies and use that to profit.

Why are many of the experts wanting something done regarding short selling? Why is Brown now calling for the city to be cleaned up?

Remember Brown brought in the regulation of the financial sector a few yrs ago when he took responsibility away from the BOE. As such he has to share his part in the fiasco. Did you actually listen to the critisms of the regulatory framework by nearly everyone after NR.

You ignore the major factors show a complete misunderstanding of the situation and then try to blame Salmond. Along with Cable they are the only 2 of the politicians that actually seem to have a handle on events.

Again you critise Neil. Serious why? (although to be honest i do not expect an honest reply from you). Neil was approach by a senior scottish financial figure to try to save BOS as a scottish instituion. All the parties in scotland seem behind atleast looking at what can be done with only labour being caught between looking out for scotland and trying to save labours face.
155

Alan B,

23/09/2008 14:11:04
#Ugly George

While you may want to validly turn the question round. We really should try to answer why these countries have done so much better. We in Scotland do not really look to see why they have done better.

The nats like me will simply point to the fact they have and most unionists will either deny it or try to point to weaknesses in their economies rather than trying to accept their success.

Realistically none of the unionist parties in Scotland have a vision for managing the scottish economy.

I do not think South America is really a good comparison. We have to compare what is happening in Europe with the instituions and free trade areas in Europe. And some of the possible advantages like the euro. Australia actually has a smallish population 20 million (just did a google). Not far in front of Netherland 16million. If i am wrong about Greece having left wing governments thanks for the correction. But my understanding is it has been badly and corruptly run.

As for Ireland. The question is not why it was poor a hundred yrs ago but how it mananged to transform its economic position over the last 30yrs. It is always easier for the rich to stay rich than for the poor to become rich.


156

noswod,

Honestus 23/09/2008 14:11:13
I did it my way and I am right spoke the man "who broke the bank" by having a £128bn funding gap between deposits and loan. Hornby should be sacked, it is quite noticable that Slamond is being fobbed off with Llyods lackies - The Lloyds Chairman and Chief Executive too busy to speak with him, let our Scottish area manager speak with the Natives. Job Losses - theres no contract on this so say nothing and sack em later. How many executive jobs have gone in TSB and Scottish Widows the answer all of the senior ones. When a society loses an accountable senior management it loses its independence and culture. Welcome to the branch office - no banks, life offices or oil here
157

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

23/09/2008 14:17:36
#181

Don't trust many of the Tories bar one - like you Goldie has impressed. Cameron looks and sounds like Blair Lite. Osborne is as over-promoted as shadow Chancellor as Milliband is as Foreign Secretary.

SNP - trust/capable

* Salmond - shrewd, competent though can come across as arrogant
* Swinney - capable if dull but that opinion may change if he makes a hash of LIT
* Mather - you don't succeed in business by being incapable - provides a rein on the more Trot Natish policies proposed
* Sturgeon - a nippy sweety - my opinion of her has gone up since last May - she knows her stuff

SNP - don't trust/incapable

* Kenny Mackaskill - looks out of his depth, promises much but rarely delivers

Labour - trust/capable

* Andy Kerr - would have been a better choice for leader than Gray - and not just in terms of his personality
* Alan Johnson - been a long-time admirer of his - even before his days as an out-and-out politician
* John Reid - does stand for any nonsense and calls a spade a spade
* Jim Murphy - a personal choice - known him well since his student days - a hard-working individual who turned what was the safest Tory seat in Scotland into a relatively safe Labour seat. Only issue I don't trust him with is Israel - he was once extremely pro-Palestinian in his views and has done a complete flip-flop over the issue.

There are others who get on and quietly do their job without blowing their own trumpet - ministers such as Woodward, Burnham, Benn and Denham.
Labour - don't trust/incapable

* Milliband - overpromoted, overgrown schoolboy who should not even be a junior minister never mind in one of the top 3 jobs
* Harman - the Harridan has delusions of her own abilities - gives most Labour wimmin a bad name
* Jacqui Smith - another over-promoted Brownie
* Geoff Hoom - aka Buff Hoon - need I say more

Others in that list would be Yvette Cooper, Douglas Alexander, Ruth Kelly, Hazel Blears and Ed balls.

Lib Dems - trust/capable
158

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

23/09/2008 14:18:12
#191 (c#181

Lib Dems - trust/capable

* Vince Cable - the Lib Dems star by a mile - puts his leader to shame
* Charles Kennedy - but for his drink problems he really could have been a star for the Lib Dems

Lib Dems don't trust/incapable

* Simon Hughes - just think he is a pompous windbagontinued)
159

Fairfax,

23/09/2008 14:20:38
Alan B (187): "Question why have many of the experts like Burt, the FSA and other said that HBOS was a well capitalised bank?"

According to the definitions, HBOS is indeed solvent. Unfortunately these definitions have been found wanting over the past year. The reason why its share price has fallen so precipitously is because it isn't well-capitalised in practice, given its regular need to refinance some £100 billion (according to City rumour) of short-term debt once financed by the wholesale markets. One cannot expect the FSA to state the full case: stating that "HBOS is well-capitalised according to the current definitions, but these definitions are now doubted across the planet." would obviously lead to a run on the bank.

"Why are many of the experts wanting something done regarding short selling?"

I don't really know, other than human herd behaviour. Collusion amongst short-sellers, as some have alleged, is certainly wrong (and already illegal) and most exchanges already have mechanisms to cease trading if panic-buying occurs. Short-selling per se I cannot see as any more wrong than buying a share: it's simply a bet on the future. One might take the view that, so long as collusion is absent, the primary good of short-selling is that it rapidly reveals an over-valued company. This is my view here: HBOS deserved to be shorted.
160

Alan B,

23/09/2008 14:21:01
#sm753

My lack of trust in Brown is probably down to a few things. Lack of competence. Running big budget deficits in good times. Breaking his own golden rules and then bending it and breaking it without being honest about it. His whole spinning and double announcing stuff. Even his budget are renouned for what they do in the small print and not what is announced. I cannot remember a chancellor doing that to such a degree.

His ruining of pension and failure to control house price inflation with the associated personal debt. Brown gets are harder view on competence from me than politician would get in other areas due to the fact I have more of an opinion on this area.

The only thing Brown really gets my support in is the independence of the BOE.

Brown has also lusted after power so much with all the media reports and his general behaviour make him seem underhand and moody.

For me their has been alot of dishonesty in labour with donations etc, even the reports into investigation of the Kelly affair etc. Brown has not taken a stand against it either because he himself is ok with it or for his own personal power.

Finally his treatment of sp like publically coming on tv and saying he will not work with the scottish government etc or not phoning salmond to congratulate him until the press embarrassed him is just immature.

As for Cameron and Osbourne. Cannot stand Osbourne. Cameron is the light weight Blair type politician i cannot stand. Prefer the David Davis politician where you really know what he believes right or wrong.
161

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

23/09/2008 14:25:29
#194 I don't particularly trust Davis either - he may have made a stand on the 42-day detention issue but it completely contradicted his stance when it came to the vote on a 28-day detention period. If he had put his hands up and said he was wrong over that then I might have had a bit more respect for his position over 42 days.
162

Alan B,

23/09/2008 14:27:07
#Federalist

I agree with much of your list. Yes Johnston is the person that i think should take over labour leadership.

Like you cannot stand Simon Hughes.

Jim Murphy seems too much of a labour right or wrong guy that will follow the party line. Lost faith in him immediately after he was involved in the scandal with labour mps and msps both claiming rent for the same shared offices.

Think it is a shame about Kennedy. Did like Ming until he took over the leadership. But some of the things he came out with particulary regarding Kennedy lost my respect.
163

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 23/09/2008 14:34:48
189 Alan B
I thought I had answered that - I agree that the smaller countries in Europe have looked at themselves relative to larger neighbours and sought how to seek an advantage. Ireland set corporation tax at 12.5% as opposed to (the then) rate of 30% in the UK so many companies were attracted to Ireland. There is no mystery or dispute about this.

What I am saying though is, just because this has happened in past, does not necessarily mean it will continue now that the big countries in Europe are aware that they have to compete with loads of small countries. This is clearly evident from the fact that France ang Germany have taken recent measures to do that. Italy are aware of the problem and are trying to do the same. Each of them now realises that they have to compete with 26 other nations for investment and business.
This then begs the question of who has the long term advantage. Lets take two simple examples. At the moment it costs the UK approx £1.5bn or £25 per capita to run the Foreign Office - ie mainly embassies. If Scotland were to provide a comparable sevice on its own this would cost £300 per capita all to be funded from taxation. Similarly if Scotland were to set up a Scottish Broadcasting Corpoation which could match the output of the BBC the licence fee would have to be in the region of £1500 to £1600.
164

Alan B,

23/09/2008 14:35:00
#Fed

"Jim Murphy - a personal choice - known him well since his student days - a hard-working individual who turned what was the safest Tory seat in Scotland into a relatively safe Labour seat"

Was it not the redrawing of the boundaries that passed this seat to Murphy. Along as the tory axe man going into meltdown.
165

Alan B,

23/09/2008 14:44:20
#Ugly George

Only Ireland of the small perfroming western european countries has really gone down the low tax route.

What we as a country (not you in particular) are failing to do is understand the real reasons for scotland under performance. And from that look for solutions.

I do not think broadcasting is really a particularly relevent example. Some would say that all tv should be commercial. Others would say Scotland do not get to spend the portion of licence fee on scottish production. While not advocating this. Republic of Ireland get the BBC free.

I would say the only areas that i could see some discussion round the advantages of the union would be foreign affairs and defence. But even here i would rather the EU took more responsbility of foreign affairs. And scotland tends to have a different outlook on defence ie nuclear. (rightly or wrongly)

166

Grahamski,

Falkirk 23/09/2008 14:52:56
187
Here's Angus Mcleod writing in The Times:
Mr Salmond (was)leaping to conclusions long before the real facts were known, determined that his old banking pals on the Mound would in no way be held responsible for the massive errors of judgment that have wrought so much damage on the financial institution of which they were in charge. If Mr Salmond will forgive the phrase, they were guilty of “unpardonable folly” and small shareholders and probably thousands of employees will be left to pay the price.. it is as well to remember that Mr Salmond's spokesman was still defending his explanation of what happened well after the truth about HBOS's sub-prime exposure and its reliance on wholesale interbank loans began to seep out. The self-regarding Mr Salmond does not, of course, do apologies but the fact remains that, courtesy of his bluster and bombast, he misled not only the Scottish Parliament but the rest of us by trying to maintain that HBOS was the victim of some external short-selling conspiracy. It simply isn't true. Indeed a simple piece of digging less than 24 hours after the event itself revealed that early last week less than 3 per cent of HBOS's stock had been borrowed from institutional investors by these awful hedge fund people.'
You seem to be about a week too late when it comes to peddling the myth of conspiracies against HBOS.
167

Grahamski,

Falkirk 23/09/2008 15:14:22
201
Indeed, wonders will never cease. Perhaps you would be good enough to point out the inaccuracies in the article.
168

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

23/09/2008 15:17:10
#198 When he was first elected it was as part of the Tory meltdown in Scotland. Many expected him to lose the seat at the next election but he did not. Much of that was down to pure hard work in his contituency - listening and dealing with constituent's problems - he apparently did almost 1200+ surgeries in his first term. He was also one of the first to do roving street surgeries - on top of his normal surgeries - going directly to the people and dealing with their problems.
169

Richard Lionheart,

23/09/2008 15:45:16
I can think of 3 Million reasons why Andy Hornby would say that this is the right thing to do.

He should hold those coins on a vertical axis and see that the front and reverse line up.
170

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 15:51:47
185

relative to who for example?
171

Sedov,

Scotland 23/09/2008 15:59:10
#201 Lara - " Salmond continues to be to be the most popular politician Scotland has ever seen" Wishful thinking Lara but I admire your defence of the SNP. Time will tell of course but I am sorry to tell you that the Salmond project of an "independent" Scotland will end in tears for you - Nationalism and Salmond have no solutions to make any real difference to the Scottish people and if they do - where are they? - Can you tell me?
172

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 16:01:00
182

So whats your point regarding on line gambling and corporation tax? and which online gambling registered businesses in the UK are you referring to?
173

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 16:03:42
208

The polls contradict your doubt Sedov but you are entitled to your own opinion no matter how dodgy the reasoning behind yer conclusions.
174

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 16:11:57
205

Oh shock and horror a party political troll has put up a link to some party political spun propaganda and we're supposed to rethink our allegencies.
There is film footage of GWB out hunting with shotguns rifles and even automatic pistols in fact there is a photo floating about with Gordon Brown manning a Mini machine gun in a helicopeter gun ship over Iraq or was it Afganistan? and its supposed to mean what exactly?
that your also a rascist as well as a documented liar?
Certainly fits in with your pretendy unionist lable.
So which office are you working from George Foulkes or the Scottish office?
175

Fairfax,

23/09/2008 17:25:24
suchaparcel (211): "there is a photo floating about with Gordon Brown manning a Mini machine gun in a helicopeter gun ship over Iraq or was it Afganistan?"

I'm no GB fan, but this sounds far too interesting for him. Are you sure this wasn't a Top Gear episode?

176

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 17:58:40
215

Top gear? Brown only ever had one. No it was actually in Afganistan he was sitting in the doorway of a Puma heli chopter manning the gattling mini machine gun in a flak jacket over his suit bit like wall street meets Platoon. He was heard shouting at the local "Get some suckas"
177

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 17:59:42
213

And Brown manning a machine gun? or Bush out hunting with multiple weapons?
178

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 18:01:59
213

And do you think Gordon Brown is doing a good job of looking after your children then?
179

,

23/09/2008 18:48:12
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
180

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 23/09/2008 18:51:36
214

Aye its a gimpy right enough and he is most definately sitting right behind it no matter wot angle you want to put on it.
Spin away ya lying wee git its there for all to see.
181

GalacticCannibal,

MurrietaCA ; for more WAR VOTE McCain 23/09/2008 19:01:37
HBOS chief: "I am convinced we have done the right thing"
---------------------------

So this Andy Hornby speaks. What a dope, he was and is part of the problem at HBOS.

Believe this dude and u will believe the earth is flat..

GC

182

Fairfax,

23/09/2008 20:18:20
Lara (220): "Fairfax,

For your entertainment!"

That was excellent -- almost as absurd as his speech today! Thanks!
183

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 23/09/2008 21:14:53
223, Menschenfresser, you Californians believe the Earth is round.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.