Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

The hunt is On.
Sponsored by
The hunt is On.
Can you track down Scotland's wildest beastie?
 
 
Wednesday, 3rd December 2008 Change Date

The Scotsman Digital Archive - Special Christmas Offer

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register

Arguments surface in two capitals over leaders' reaction to takeover



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: 19 September 2008
By HAMISH MACDONELL
IN POLITICAL terms, the aftermath of the takeover of HBOS was very much a tale of two cities.


In Edinburgh, Alex Salmond twice hailed the unity of the Scottish Parliament as all parties came together in the common cause of defending Scottish jobs and interest.

In London, however, Gordon Brown was under pressure from both sides of the
Border for his role in brokering the takeover.

While the Prime Minister had hoped his intervention would be seen as a positive move, in England he was accused of intervening to protect jobs in his own part of the country, while in Scotland he was painted as having aided the death of a national institution.

Meanwhile, in Scotland, following the rare display of unity at First Minister's questions yesterday, party politics began to bubble to the surface.

A source close to the First Minister argued that, given the speedy way the European Central Bank intervened to pump money into the system, Scotland would have been better off under a European regime than under the UK government.

This was derided, though, by Andy Kerr, Labour's finance spokesman. He said: "Here we have a Scottish institution taken over by a UK institution.

"We have the ability to argue for the retention of headquarters' functions and for Scottish business because we are part of the UK."

He added: "If Scotland was independent, this would be a takeover by another foreign bank. We would have little leeway in arguing against it."

"They couldn't have done anything in an independent Scotland to prevent this."

There was also a dispute over the First Minister's interpretation of the takeover, in which he portrayed HBOS as an exemplary financial institution that was preyed on by unscrupulous speculators.

A source close to Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, described this version of events as "complete nonsense", claiming that HBOS had become vulnerable because of the way it had used the money markets to finance mortgages.

The source said HBOS had been struggling and the Lloyds TSB takeover was the best possible option.

The alternative would have been a ruinous run on the bank.

Mr Brown's spokesman said: "The Prime Minister did not lobby on issues of jobs relating to any part of the UK. These are decisions taken by Lloyds."





The full article contains 387 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 19 September 2008 12:00 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Halifax Bank of Scotland
 
1

Gregor Addison,

Glasgow 19/09/2008 00:25:29
Andy Kerr said: "They couldn't have done anything in an independent Scotland to prevent this."

Not strictly true, of course. Russia and America have moved to stop speculative buying. It's feasible that an independent Scotland could have done the same. Instead, we have a merger that will cost jobs in Scotland. And when a bank in America is taken over in a merger no-one doubts that America should be independent.

The attempts by unionists to paper over the cracks by suggesting some kind of union dividend are apalling. This dividend seems to only ever travel in one direction - allegedly, to the benefit of Scotland. The bail out of Northern Rock was not seen as a 'union dividend'. In Scotland we are to watch one of our oldest financial institutions disappear, along with many jobs, but be grateful they haven't gone overseas. Let's face it, whether or not your job went to France, Germany or England is all the same when you've got no job.
2

Brian Hill,

19/09/2008 00:31:20
I have a feeling that Salmond's views will prevail over those of Kerr, Darling et al of the Unionist political/media cabal.

He hasn't put a foot wrong during this crisis, has displayed in depth knowledge of the subject, intelligence, confidence and leadership, all of which has been welcomed by the public and indeed most of the opposition MSPs.



3

Darien,

Panama 19/09/2008 00:32:32
Andy Kerr said: "If Scotland was independent, this would be a takeover by another foreign bank. We would have little leeway in arguing against it." Kerr is a balloon.

Actually, if Salmond was running an independent Government he would have nationalised HBOS and then the HQ, control and jobs would have remained in Scotland, and Scotland could have had its own national bank at relatively low cost (cost equiv to a couple of years oil tax revenue). That represents a major difference between an independent nationalist Gov in Edinburgh with real powers and the UK Gov in London. Scots voters need to think on that. The SNP has a Scotland agenda; Brown does not.
4

jimboo,

fife 19/09/2008 00:32:47
NINJA loans, bad investments in the H department subsidised by the BOS, would not matter so much if Brown had invested in expanding the country's manufacturing base but UK over reliant in financial sector. Wee Ecks proposed tiger economy would have been just as bad. Brown and Salmond live in one dimensional world, it is like a nation's farmers relying on one crop and creating a monoculture, one pest and all is lost. One thing, this can be laid at Browns door, "A bad boy did it and ran away" may have worked with the war but not this. It has nothing to do with parochial politics but unfettered free market policies.
5

jimboo,

Fife 19/09/2008 00:43:42
3# The SNP has a capitalist free market agenda and have abandoned the basic social democratic consensus in support of an 80/20 society which has no place for the poor and disenfranchised. See Bailllieston by election had a 22% turnout. 22% speaks volumes on our belief in democracy. Think SNP may have won as they had the most first preference votes, not sure how the count works.
6

Edward,

19/09/2008 00:43:46
Andy Kerr is actually lying through his teeth on this, or perhaps he is clueless of facts
The European Central Bank is and has made available funds to any European bank that finds itself in difficulty
I’m currently in Portugal, and have seen this shown widely on the news.
The question everyone should be asking is, why Gordon Brown did not use this faculty. Andy Kerr seems to allude that the European Central Bank is just another commercial concern, instead of the Central Bank of the EU
7

Edward,

19/09/2008 00:46:58
There is something strange, when a Prime Mimister has lunch with the head of Lloyds TSB a day or two before the trouble started for HBOS
Another question that should be considered is this, when Northern Rock had trouble, why didnt the UK government have Lloyds TSB take them over?
8

Neil Waugh,

Old Strathcona 19/09/2008 00:55:21
In many real countries (Canada being one) there are strict limits on foreign ownership of banks. If Scots peope were in control of their own destiny, none of this might have happened.
And the London @ssholes who rigged this deal would have been told to take a hike. Or better still rounded up in a takedown by the Scottish constabulary.
Which, I hope, is still an option that Our Alex is contemplating.
Battering ram. Dead of night. Door in splinters in some Home Counties pile. Leg irons in a wee van. Sobbing suits. Back to the scene of the crime in Edinburgh for a little tough love justice - Scottish style. A Bernie Ebbers sentence comes quickly to mind.
9

somerferg,

perth 19/09/2008 01:29:52

Jimboo - please explain HOW,WHERE and WHEN the SNP "abandoned" a social democratic agenda. From where I and many others are looking the SNP have done what they promised since they were elected and continue to work against the distruptive influence of a pro-unionist media and the parasitic Wasteminster government to fight for Scotland and all Scots. More than you could ever say for the Liebour/FibDems or Tory parties ever did. Oh and as far as the recent by-election goes - GET OVER IT YOU LOST!
10

Edwardg,

19/09/2008 01:37:22
7* Edward, the government actually invited Lloyds TSB to rescue Northern Rock. However the deal collapsed when the government refused to provide a £30 billion loan which Lloyds demanded as a condition for the purchase. In other words, Lloyds were happy to buy Northern Rock as long as the tax payer shouldered all the risk. The government was actually heavily criticised for not finding a private buyer for Northern Rock which may explain their haste in the HBOS instance.
11

Edwardg,

19/09/2008 01:54:28
6* As far as I am aware the Bank of England has been pumping money into the markets over the past few days, weeks and months. Indeed, every central bank in the developed world has been doing pretty much the same thing in this respect.

3* I think thats wishful thinking on your part. HBOS, while based in Scotland (its global hq), has most of its business in England. Indeed its operational hq is in Halifax and its primary listing is on the London Stock Exchange. As a result in a hypothetical situation in which Scotland is independent and the same thing happens, the Scottish would have to act in consultation with the government south of the border. Therefore no such drastic action would be possible.

I would also like to ask those who have been expressing their horror at the fact that HBOS have been taken over by an "English Bank" to remember that the reverse happened with the Royal Bank of Scotland. RBS was transformed from a regional bank by buying the much larger "English bank" Natwest.

12

ChinaBear,

Hong Kong 19/09/2008 02:09:32
What a load of one sided rubbish in these comments. Firstly, to campare Scotland with America and Russia in such a crisis is just an insult to the intelligence. A country of 4.5m people being able to react financially the same way as countries with over 300m people and massive natural resources..... Why waste my breath.

Secondly, on the subject of the EU supporting ailing banks, well I didn't see that happen when Northern Rock went down. Again, utter rubbish.

Finally, it's time to sniff the coffee. HBOS has been badly managed. To assume that because it's Scottish and therefore it must be perfect is madness. The main customer base for the group (90%) lives South of the border. The majority of employees are South of the border and the rescue has come, wait for it ....yes South of the border. The same company in fact who rescued Scottish Widows and many Scottish jobs after that particular institution had been badly managed.

It's about time you narrow minded, insecure and twisted lot started to realise that when the chips are down, Mr Fish can do absolutely nothing. He's a completely insignificant player in the business/political landscape when this sort of scale of crisis is reached.

Focus on the facts, it's the UK as a whole and only the UK that can, has and will continue to support Scottish interests.
13

Il Penseroso,

Inverurie 19/09/2008 02:42:20
Andy Kerr was a disaster as health minister. He was besotted with PPP/PFI, a fiscal elephant round our necks. My grandchildren will need to pay for this idiot's financial "skills" for years to come. Now he is the shadow finance minister under the new Scottish Labour team. And you think Alistair Darling is a waste of space! Watch this guy in operation! Hide your wallets.
14

Il Penseroso,

19/09/2008 02:47:08
China Bear GB is such a great place I see you have sought refuge from it's excellence by working in Hong Kong.Maybe you work for a GB bank there. Read up your history. It was Scottish banking expertise that made Hong Kong the success it became.
15

karinxxx,

19/09/2008 02:54:04
hmm time for hbos customers to switch to the royal bank of scotland i think.
16

walter,

19/09/2008 03:02:29
Grow up for god sake, America could not stop its 3rd and 4th biggest financial institutes going to the wall and at this time they are trying to prevent the same happening to the 2nd biggest and yous people believe that if Scotland was independent then Salmond would have been able to prevent this from happening to HBOS.
HBOS who have a customer base 4 times the population of Scotland, utter rubbish.
17

the_figures_are _fudged,

Galashiels 19/09/2008 03:57:30
The whole point is , an independent Scotland would not have sat and watched one of its banks go from £10 a share to 88p in the space of a year and taken absolutely no action.

This is what Salmond is accusing Bean and his FSA of.

So now half the mortgages in Scotland have been bought for peanuts by Lloyds TSB, and the country is set to lose thousands of banking jobs too.
18

Richardinho,

19/09/2008 04:06:19
I think in an independent Scotland circumstances would have been so different that it's impossible to say how things might have worked out.
The overall feeling that I am left with however is one of severe helplessness; The sense that Scotland was once again completely powerless to stop one of its most important institutions being laid low.
19

Sierra Foothills Scot,

Diamond Springs 19/09/2008 04:44:30
#12 ChinaBoor -
Did the UK government ask the ECB for support?

Incidentally, Since you insist on being juvenile by renaming Alex Salmond, I have given you a more appropriate name.
20

Boy Wonder,

19/09/2008 06:03:19
Aw this economic talk is giein' me a sair heid!
21

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 19/09/2008 06:40:33
16

The fact is Walter the Scottish government didnt have the option whether they could or could not have excersized it. The problem is we will never know now.
But when these things rear their ugly heads wouldnt it be better if we had a Government in place to be in a position to interfere rather than having to rely on a Government who's best interests are served by not running interference?
Now run along Walter as I know you never answer awkward questions anyway.
Are you enjoying your council tax freeze by the way?
4% better of already eh?
22

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 19/09/2008 06:42:00
18

Exactly and Scotland has never been anything other than powerless within this so called union.
23

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 19/09/2008 06:44:45
12 see 21.
If this happened in China and it was the Japanese governments decision whether to run interference or not how would the Chinese people feel about it if the Japanese let their bank be taken over by a Japanese bank?
24

Eckyboo,

Edinburgh 19/09/2008 06:48:20
After `Broon` and his cronies overruled the Competition Commission over the creation of this `Superbank` I think BAA should put two fingers up at the Competition Commission and keep all of the Airports they have been told they must sell.
25

LEAL,

19/09/2008 07:05:24
London Labour are anti Scottish.
26

Mikey,

19/09/2008 07:09:27
#12, ChinaBoor. Your views are neither wanted nor needed. You are a nonentity. Stick to explaining why a bullet in the back of the head is so vital for the Chinese economy!
27

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 19/09/2008 07:48:15
Once again England comes to Scotland's rescue.

It's the scenario that began with the Act of Union.

It's embarrassing, but who will rescue us after independence? Alex? If he is so smart then why didn't he jump about warning us all BEFORE these terrible events?

I'm afraid the SNP remains part of the problem, not the solution.

Federation is the only sensible way forward
28

Richardinho,

19/09/2008 08:01:51
#27 What is embarassing is your constant defeatism.
29

danielrober,

19/09/2008 08:28:14
Alex.S is succeeding in one of his objectives, stated at the last election. His wish to see more people bedate Scotland as an economic entity and separate state.

Well i have taken more interest than i would wish and find myself repeatably shocked by the anti-Anglo-Scot/British/English/everyone LIES from the SNP. Has the SNP learnt absolutely NOTHING form the economic collapses of 68-88. That politicians do not know how to run companies better than there managers, owners and employees.

The SNP are an unreformed British Political Party still obsessed with the power of the state over all aspects of peoples lives.

Anger, hatred, bile - is there nothing in your heart Alec.S for people just trying help. Its a shame, i hope you find some peace without trashing 5 million peoples economic lives.

Please go to a church or find a place of contentment. You can not drive your anger into the lives of young and old people, its not right and you know.
30

,

19/09/2008 08:33:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
31

BIG EYE,

Paisley 19/09/2008 08:37:55
29

I hope you are taking your pills as your powers of reasoning seem to have abandoned you altogether.
32

Brodric,

19/09/2008 08:37:58
28 - Richardhino - thankyou for coming up with a decent response to No 27 Rulesbutnotrulers. I couldn't think of anything that wasn't insulting.

No 18 Richardhino and No 22 Suchaparcelofrogues - couldn't agree more.
33

Doh,

19/09/2008 08:45:33

The government has already given far too much money to the bankers to cover up for their greed and bad management.

There are rumours that all the bad debt will be nationalised. That really is the last straw.
Private proft and national debt.

This is the end of the road for right wing economic market theories. Thatcher and New Labour have a lot
to answer for.

The banks should remain private.
But really private, they should not be traded on the stock market. Teh stock market doesnt need a bunch of ineffective silly trading - no shorting on Tuesday if there is a full moon.

We need new ideaa. Big ideas. new forms of ownership.

Mutuals, cooperatives, partnerships - not meangingless Labour soundbites about atakeholders.

Labour have passed the last 10 years acting as Tories and we have all paid the price.

34

danielrober,

19/09/2008 08:54:48
# 31 BIG EYE,Paisley

Who will you trade with? Who will buy Scotland's products and services after your boss has labeled everyone else to blame for Scotland's problems?

Alex.S pushes and pushes. Well personally i'm getting sick of it and might just start to push back.

So SNP. A Bank is bought by another UK company saving 10000's of jobs and countless mortgages. Yet you don't like the racial and national make up of the company so its hatred time.

Yet another company based in Glasgow is been bought up, also for £12 billion, losing Scotland a primary industry - nothing from the SNP. British Energy will have decisions taken away from it in a more radical manner than this bank merger and yet nothing from the SNP.


You guys make me want to puke. Shame on you Alec.S, you are a bad leader of Scotland.
35

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 19/09/2008 08:58:58
34

Yes and while you have your head down the toilet chucking up we will all miss you terribly on these blogs.
36

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 19/09/2008 09:01:12
#12 "It's about time you narrow minded, insecure and twisted lot started to realise that when the chips are down, Mr Fish can do absolutely nothing."

We know that perfectly well, you dolt. That's why we want the situation changed, by freeing Scotland from the dead hand of Westminster before Brown and his discredited neo-liberals drag us down with the rest of their failed UK.

We know only too well how limited Holyrood's powers are, which is why we want it given all the powers of a full government that most of the world's nations enjoy. Try to keep up.
37

danielrober,

19/09/2008 09:04:06
# 35 suchaparcelofrogues,Scotland

No you'll miss my comments because you'll be collecting a reduced dole payment.

Unless of course your one of the proetcted few, untouchables, waiting to get your hands of vast cheap government loans?
38

Grumpy,

19/09/2008 09:15:59
My only hope is that Andy Hornby gets his just deserts and gets the boot from HBOS. Took 300 odd years to build Bank of Scotland and only 7 years for The Halifax under his rule to destroy it.

Maybe he should re-apply for a job at Asda - stcking shelves.
39

Edward,

19/09/2008 09:21:33
Its curious that what is coming out now is the ban on Short trading/selling is only going to be TEMPORARY on Alistair Darlings orders!
Why is that idiot only making it Temporary instead or permanently illegal? Once again Brown and Darling fudgeing the issue. By making it temporary, it means they will not be going after the Banks or traders on this. It was curious during an interview that Brown stated that it was Banks that were involved in the Short trading scandal, but wouldnt name them. Well lets try Barclays for a start and also Lloyds TSB
as no english banks were attacked, just Scottish based banks
40

Edward,

19/09/2008 09:23:39
#29 danielrober
Grow up!
41

Alastair the First,

19/09/2008 09:26:07
This whole thing stinks. I suspect that Gordon Brown is linked to all this - has the short selling been orchestrated by his cronies to damage Scotland as an act of revenge and to try to scare people away from seizing our independence? He is a devious wee gobsh1te and I wouldn't trust him an inch. Or should that be 25.4mm?
42

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

19/09/2008 09:29:42
The truth is that independence or not this crisis would still have happened.

Whilst a government (UK or Scottish) could have taken some sort of action on short-sellers, it was not short-sellers that brought down HBOS. HBOS was brought down by the greed and incompetence of its own management.
43

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 19/09/2008 09:30:56
41 Alastair
Here we go again - yet another anti-Scottish conspiracy theory.
44

Alan B,

19/09/2008 09:36:51
#danielrober

In your rant about Salmond you seem unware of some of what has been going on. Andrew Neil's politcal program last night was illuminating.

Andrew Neil as you know is an arch unionist. However last night he was singing Salmonds praises as being the only political leader who understood the problems and was ahead of the game. (which wound up Vince Cable as he thought of himself as the only 1 of the 3 big parties that had a clue).

Salmond had been appartently lobbying Brown to do something about short selling. Brown effectively told him to get stuffed. The US now have banned short selling for a period of time and Brown has now followed suit.

Osborne of the tories has been all over the place.

So in truth the only party leader with a clue about the economics of the situation is the only leader who has an economic background.

Where Salmond leads Brown just follows the US who implemented the same policy Salmond had called for and Brown had rejected. A policy that may have saved HBOS.
45

danielrober,

19/09/2008 09:36:52
Some guys wish to mock my beliefs, well okay that's your choice. I'm a practicing Literal Christian and respector of other peoples faiths. I'll say a long pray for you guys in the night. I hope you can find some peace, hope and faith in the rest of mankind.
46

danielrober,

19/09/2008 09:42:13
# 44 Alan.B

I think you misunderstand that my postings have 'never' been motivated by politics. I just believe in logical debate and recourse. Their is more to life than politics. Work, sport, family, friends, drinking beer with your pal's in peace and yes religion too.

I just have no intention of letting 'any' of the politicians play merry with our lives for the reason of a voter survey. There are just some many other things to be done and things that need starting.
47

Alan B,

19/09/2008 09:42:53
#The Federalist

It is more than just incompetence of the HBOS management it is the incompetence of the uk labour government.

The uk government should have regulated the banking industry so that it was low risk. Brown changed the regulatory regime and has continued on the dangerous deregualtion path. That has come back and bitten us badly.

Last night a labour mp was blaming the tories for it becuase of the deregulation of the mid 80s. The fact is no bank went bust under the 17yrs of tory rule but 2 have gone to the wall in effect under Browns regualatory regime.

Brown then followed this incompetence by mishandly NR. And like a house of cards once you let the first one fail then the whole thing looks dodgy.

And as i posted above, Brown seems be behind the game in dealing with short selling.
48

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 19/09/2008 09:45:44
42

"The truth is that independence or not this crisis would still have happened"

Is this your opinion or do you have undeniable evidence?
49

Hamish Scott,

19/09/2008 09:47:02
#41
That is unfortunately quite possible. It's interesting how varied are the interpretations of Brown's role is in all this. In the English press online forums he is seen as saving Scottish jobs at the expense of English ones. If either of these possibilities are true it could be the end of Brown as PM. The truth will out.
50

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 19/09/2008 09:47:22
42

No doubt both of these factors played a part but it couldnt have happened just with incompetant managers or else most banks would have gone under by now so the ultimate factor is down to the speculators not the management.
51

Alan B,

19/09/2008 09:48:55
#46 danielrober

For someone not interested you post in #29 about "LIES from the SNP" in a thread about the dealing with a severe economic crisis.

However it is actually Salmond due the fact he has an economic background that is the only politician (except maybe Cable) that seems to understand what is going on and how to deal with it ahead of time.

Off course their is more to life than politics but this is a thread discussing the economic meltdown of the banking sector and how competent the political parties and government have been in dealing with the crisis.

"I just believe in logical debate and recourse"
it does not seem like it when you start ranting about lies with nothing to back it up.
52

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 19/09/2008 09:49:37
43

Yes of course there is no chance anybody in the UK government would perpetrate any act in order to prevent Scotland becomming independent or reducing the chances of it happening thats for sure.
53

Hamish Scott,

19/09/2008 09:52:29
#27
"Once again England comes to Scotland's rescue.
It's the scenario that began with the Act of Union."

No it didn't. The only parallel is that English policy pre-1707 was key in the failure of the Darien scheme just as English policy now was key in the failure of HBOS. Hardly a ringing endorsement of the Union.
54

Hamish Scott,

19/09/2008 09:55:17
#12
"It's about time you narrow minded, insecure and twisted lot."

You've landedon the wrong website, here to help:
www.telegraph.co.uk
55

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 19/09/2008 09:57:34
53 Hamish Scott
So its official then? Anything that goes wrong with a Scottish institution is always the fault of the English. How puerile!
56

morris,

edinburgh 19/09/2008 09:57:54
29

Salmond was a senior economist in the banking sector with RBS Group( which is a giant in banking terms).

Politicians do not know how to run companies better than THERE managers, owners and employees say you.
(it should read THEIR of course).
If the politician in question is the same person ie has been both then your comment is nearly as crazy as you are for making it!
It depends very much upon the individual,and politicians are no different.

Just look at Andy Kerr!
57

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

19/09/2008 09:59:17
#39 Short-sellers have been attacking a range of institutions (not just banks) including:

* Barratt Developments (house-builder)
* Persimmon (housebuilder)
* Debenhams
* HMV
* Bradford & Bingley
* Alliance & Leicester
*

Abroad short-sellers have attcaked firmks including:

* Bear Stearns (USA)
* Lehman Brothers (USA)
* Babcock & Brown (Australia)
* Macquarie Group (Australia)
* MBIA (USA)
* Morgan Stanley (USA)

This is not a phenomenon that is confined to one country or one sector. One also has to recognise that there are two types of short-seller. The first group are the longest, most-established - they will short-sell on a company that is genuinely over-priced - a company that has institutional or structural weaknesses. The second type of short-seller are the real bottom feeders - they short-sell then deliberately spread false (but plausible) rumours that a company is in trouble. HBOS have been under attack from both groups not just this week but three times previously. At least one previous attack (in March) was instigated by a false rumour.

The real crime here is not short-selling itself but the spreading of the false rumours. Such rumours may not only lead to a short-term fall in stock prices but also be self-perpetuating. Bear Stearns is a classic example of such a rumour - investors believed the bank was in trouble so withdrew their money - and so it was in trouble.

That all being said, I don't believe that this was the case with HBOS - HBOS clearly did have fundamental weaknesses - it had around £450 billion of credit but only had £250 billion in assets to cover its liabilities.
58

Me, myself and I,

Livingston 19/09/2008 10:02:49
The economies of the USA,UK,Russia,EU and the asian economies are completely intertwined due to the wonders of globalisation which suits us when we want cheap clothes and electronics.

When China has massive currency reserves, like the middle east oil economies they can now pull all the strings. We now dance to their tune after fifty years of consumption and developing a "service" economy.

We make nothing, we sell nothing and we earn nothing. Manufacturing is for the poor countries.

For several months Salmond has been claiming, ironically like Gordon Brown with the UK, that somehow Scotland was immune from the world economy. He's supposed to be an economist.

Historically Scotland always caught the disease after the south east economy. Unemploment, inflation, house price rise/falls several months behind. Always.

We may get hit later but invariably, harder. It suits Salmond to spin the blame on the UK as it suits his ultimate agenda of being the big fish in the little pond. Regardless if the rest of us are floating at the top of the pond.

Pay your debts and save money. Earn a guinea and spend a pound to be a happy man.
59

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

19/09/2008 10:07:21
#47 Guess which politcian said this:

"Take financial services. With RBS and HBOS - two of the world's biggest banks - Scotland has global leaders today, tomorrow and for the long-term.

And a growing number of American firms - not least JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley and State Street - are discovering that the Scottish financial sector can do anything you can do in London and can do it better and rather importantly in the current environment can do it at lower cost."
60

Hamish Scott,

19/09/2008 10:07:27
#55
"53 Hamish Scott
So its official then? Anything that goes wrong with a Scottish institution is always the fault of the English. How puerile!"

No. Read my post again.
It was a reply to an earlier post where someone claimed the English had rescued us with the Union and HBOS now.
I referred to two things going wrong: the Darien scheme over 300 years ago and HBOS now. I think you'll quite a few things went wrong in the intervening 300 years. And I said English policy (not the English people) played 'a key part'- not the only part.
61

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

19/09/2008 10:09:09
#58 The phrase "No man is an island" has never been truer - those who think that somehow Scotland - or the UK for that matter - is somehow immune from the problems of global capitalism are living in cloud-cuckoo land.
62

danielrober,

19/09/2008 10:10:12
# 51 Alan B,

Am i meant to prove my faith by waiting for divine intervention to sort your man out. God helps those who help themselves. Politicans are not the only people living in these islands.

Well you admire Vince Cable for saying what many of us have been saying for years. If you borrow money you need to pay it back. Banks are businesses not charities.

Well if after separation and the ques for jobs are only relieved by migration to the remaining parts of the UK will you say sorry and reverse your decision on separation?

I don't think so. So I'll ask again why in the middle of international war, energy crisis, financial melt down are you still charging to the cliff edge? Why not wait a few years for this storm to be over?
63

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 19/09/2008 10:11:31
61

Luckily there is nobody on these blogs that thinks that way then isnt it?
64

Alan B,

19/09/2008 10:12:04
#The Federalist

Not sure what your point is.

"And a growing number of American firms - not least JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley and State Street - are discovering that the Scottish financial sector can do anything you can do in London and can do it better and rather importantly in the current environment can do it at lower cost."

I would imagine that is because of the move for london of JP and MS to employ people in glas. Think there are a variety of reasons for it. From more available skilled labour, to decent performance once offices have been established to sept 11.

65

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 19/09/2008 10:12:34
59

And guess which politician sold one of the banks down the river?
66

Hamish Scott,

19/09/2008 10:12:42
#59
I presume it must have been Alex Salmond or another indepedentista as no unionist would be that positive about anything to do with Scotland.
Given that we have 'lost' HBOS to short selling and that Alex Salmond wanted London to make it illegal and London did nothing Alex Salmod's quote is accurate: "the Scottish financial sector can do anything you can do in London and can do it better"
67

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 19/09/2008 10:13:43
44 Alan B
I cannot accept your analysis. Any careful, objective analysis of this whole issue must conclude that the takeover of HBOS did not come about as the result of short selling. Alex Salmond's version of events is totally lacking in credibility. The alleged short selling took place on Monday and Tuesday but the news of the takeover being at an "advanced stage" (jargon for done and dusted) broke on Wednesday morning. Negotiations on a £12bn takeover cannot be set up between two boards and concluded in a few hours especially as a waiver of competition rules had to be sought. These negotiations must have started some time ago.

Also, if as he claims, HBOS is sound but was forced into a takeover on the cheap by unjustified short selling why does another bank come in with a better hostile offer now that short selling has been stopped. And, of course, if this is an unfair takeover the shareholders of HBOS can still reject it particularly as short selling is not now a factor to be considered. On news of the takeover the price of HBOS shares shot up meaning that short sellers would have been caught with an open position and lost a packet. No trader in his right mind short sells a stock if he thinks it may be taken over and no trader would deliberately force down a share price through short selling to a level where the company is vulnerable to a takeover thus resulting in a big loss on a short positiopn.

The more you look at the specific details the more you realise that Alex Salmonds version of events does not make any sense.
68

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 19/09/2008 10:15:06
57

Yes of course and the fact that this happened during a constitutional crises for the government didnt hold any sway at all in spite of having a competition regulation breach and already acting to shore a bank with the same difficulties.
69

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 19/09/2008 10:15:40
44 Alan B
Sorry - ist sentence in 2nd paragraph shouls read"why does another bank NOT come in with a better, hostile offer.
70

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 19/09/2008 10:16:18
67

Alex Salmonds "version" of events is shared by many down south how many times do you have to be reminded?
71

morris,

edinburgh 19/09/2008 10:20:48
55
Firstly Westminster government (not England)is being accused,and the two in particular are a Scot (Bean)and a Londoner (Darling)who represents Edinburgh South West.Nobody is blaming England .


I suggest you read 7

What do you suppose Gordon was discussing over lunch?

Clearly it involves Lloyds TSB,so what else have they been involved in lately that would involve the attention of the Prime Minister.If there is an explanation then all they have to do is tell us what it was!
72

Alan B,

19/09/2008 10:21:19
#danielrober

My point was not regarding independence. But the management of this economic crisis. ie no matter whether you agree with independence or not Salmond appears to be well ahead of the game in how to deal with the crisis.

Your post which i came back on #29 was becuase of the bile you were spewing. I notice you have not addressed my point that one of senior political commentators who is an arch unionist was saying Salmond has lobbied Brown to take a course of action and Brown refused but has now followed suit after Bush decides to adopt the very same policy, but only after the collapse of HBOS.

Specifically regarding independence which you ask. The union has been a failure for scotland economically over the past 3 or 4 decades atleast (there is no point in arguing wether it was or was not good a hundered yrs ago). We have seen scotland continue with slow economic growth less than 2% per yr over the last 30yrs and 2.2% over the last decade trailing badly behind the rest of the uk at 2.8% which itself trails behind the group of small european countries which have averaged 3.6%.

If something is failing you deal with it. You do not say we are in a difficult period so we will hang on the the model that has failed us when times were good.
73

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 19/09/2008 10:26:27
70 suchaparcelofrogues
If that is the case perhaps you can explain, on their behalf, the glaring inconsistencies and discrepancies I mentioned.
74

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

19/09/2008 10:29:24
#51 The problem is that when you look at the wider picture most of the political parties follow much the same economic orthodoxy. Whilst there may be tinkering around the edges and arguments over the finer detail they all support the existing structure as it stands.

More regulation may have prevented short-sellers attacking HBOS but it would not have in all likelyhood dealt with the fundamental structural problems.

What is even more hypocritical is that SNP policy over regulation is itself confused. They cannot tell us whether there would be an independent scottish regulator after independence or if they would remain within the UK regulatory regime:

http://business.scotsman.com/personal-finance/Swinney-bids-to-quell-independence.4124748.jp

'But asked if there could be a unified system of regulation continued after independence, Swinney replied: "That certainly would be one of the options.'




75

Alan B,

19/09/2008 10:32:24
#Ugly George

I think there are a few issues.

HBOS management have run a business model (gearing etc debt to desposit ratio) that we fine until the credit crunch but then has come unstuck.

My personal view is the government should have regulated the banking industry to ensure stability ie credit to deposit ratios etc. Over the last 30 yrs we have seen more and more deregulation. The problem is it has gone too far. Banks are not normal business and underpin the whole economy and as such should not fail. Brown who changed the regulatory regime must take alot of responsibility. We all know business will try to maximise profits with the regulatory rules so it is the regulatory rules that essentially failed us. (the US are just as bad).

With regard to short selling. Yes there was underlying issues with HBOS. But the question is would it have gone bust without the short selling. Could the government have helped HBOS in a better way without waving competition rules and pushing through a merger if the short selling had not happened. Lets face it we do not know. What we do know is short selling pushed the bank to the brink.

If short selling is not a problem why have the US now banned it till Jan. So it is not Salmond alone. The US have also launched criminal investigations into the short selling over their.

Can you tell me why when Salmond asked Brown to do something about short selling he refused. But when Bush has now implemented it the UK is now following suit.

I am not saying dealing with short selling would end all problems. What i am saying is the it appear to have made problems worse, with alot of hints about illegal activity (ie spreading illegal rumours).
76

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

19/09/2008 10:34:23
#44 Salmond may well have a clue about the economics but it does not necessarily follow that he and his party have the policies to deal with them.

My own view is that no political party would have had the policies in place to prevent this happening - none of them have ever seriously addressed the issue of personal debt and the credit boom.
77

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 19/09/2008 10:34:39
73

They are only glaring discrepencies and inconsistances in your mind unless you can flesh them out can you?
78

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 19/09/2008 10:36:20
76

Certainly not within the present constitutional restraints and how would it be any better within a Federal scenario?
How would a federal government be able to save the bank?
79

Alan B,

19/09/2008 10:38:02
#Ugly George

My understanding of short selling appears to be different from yours. Is it not when a trader effectively borrows share, sells them, (rumours fly around the share price drops) and then buys them back, and pockets the difference.
80

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 19/09/2008 10:41:12
77 suchaparcelofrogues
It is now patently obvious that all you can do is hurl insults and abuse - anybody can do that but you cannot put forward any coherent argument, analysis or evidence to support your assertions and insults.
81

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

19/09/2008 10:43:15
#75 The issue of short-sellers hides the deeper-rooted problems of HBOS and simlar financial institutions. I agree more could and should have been done over the issue but is dwarfed by the real problems. Whether regulation would have resolved issues such as over-gearing is another matter - in these matters HBOS was not even a UK firm but an international firm - it would not have taken a financial genius to avoid regulation through the transference of debt to overseas subsidiaries.

Both Salmond and darling have been blinkered in their approach to regualtion - seeing it as a Scottish/UK issue - neither it appears is willing to look at pan-European regulation which may have stopped some of the worst excesses of the industry. In any case, the whole issue is one that cannot be dealt with by one country alone - it needs coordinated international action.
82

Brodric,

19/09/2008 10:48:26
No 38 - Grumpy. He got his just desserts OK - £2 million of shares in Lloyds.

Stacking shelves in Asda would be above his credibility level. He should have to do charitable voluntary work with the poor to see what happens when greed takes over from common sense.

But WHO in their right mind would get a retailer to run a Bank. HBOS' ambition to be one of the biggest fish in the pond contributed in a large part to its demise. And the short-traders finished them off.

The prob is WHO were the short-traders. I still think something stinky is going on given that it was mooted only a few weeks ago that Scottish banks' right to print its own money should be withdrawn for the sake of financial security.

Is it not a wee bit odd that this has happened now. How convenient. HBOS was vulnerable, that is a fact, but were the short-traders connected to those that mooted taking away the right of Scottish banks to print money??
83

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 19/09/2008 10:48:58
80

Yes of course it is George and its just as obvious all you can do is lie.
I prefer my methods.
84

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 19/09/2008 10:50:32
81

So how would a Federal government handle the problem? any different from a non Federal government?
Any advantages for a Federal government in this case?
85

Edward,

19/09/2008 10:51:09
Its interesting that Alex Salmond has been calling for a total ban on short trading and made a request to Gordon Brown weeks before the fall of HBOS. But was ignored by Brown
The thing is Alex Salmond is a qualified economist, so knows a thing or two about economics
Brown on the other hand is not and neither is Darling. Now you would think that Brown and Darlin would welcome professional advise, instead of rubbishing it!
(I would loved to have seen the Alex Salmond interview on america's NBC on the subject)
Now Brown and Darling are following the US Fed's example of banning Short trading, but too late to help HBOS and they are only doing it as a temprorary measure
They never learn.
Roll on indpendence and lets be shot of fools like Brown and Darling and there Ilke. At least an Independent Scotland will be fully responsible on its decisions and not rely on the half baked interferance of Westminster
86

Alan B,

19/09/2008 10:52:21
#The Federalist

You may or may not be right about whether the other parties would have managed the economic issues better or not. But what we can do is judge how well Brown has done given that he was the chancellor for a decade.

Brown to me has been poor with the fundamentals.

1)running big budget deficits during good times so that when the global economic turns choppy we are not in a good position to deal with it. figure i saw today shows that the deficit for the month was over 10billion. We are also being taken to task for deliberate fiscal irresponsibility by the EU. Brown set himself golden rules and then proceded to break and fudge them. Apparently with pfi and unfunded public sector pension taken into account the uk debt is now more than 100% of GDP.

While you say all the parties have the same economic philosophy. the tories (atleast under thatcher) were much more about balancing budgets. When they had deficits it tended to be due to economic mismangement whereas brown has just spend far more money than was coming in during a decent economic climate.

2)house price inflation - the government has done nothing to stop this and actually encouraged it in some ways. In my view they should have control the level of mortgage to salary consisten with low house price inflation. Should also look at supply and buy to let.

3)personal debt - this is link to the whole mess with house prices.

4)regulation of the financial sector to ensure stability. Brown changed the regime and then we have seen the collapses since. He should have ensured that we banks had saving to debt ratios that meant we were more risk averse.

Yes the tories might not have been much better, who knows. Independence and this financial crisis are 2 different things and i do not see the point in confusing the 2. I was just pointing out Salmond seemed to be ahead of the game in relation to short selling. And questioned why Brown refused Salmonds request for action regarding this practi
87

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 19/09/2008 10:58:12
79 Alan B
That is one feature of short selling but there is muc