Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

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

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.

The downfall of the Scottish banks



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: 14 October 2008
• Dark day as centuries of tradition come to an end

• Chiefs Goodwin and Hornby brought down

• Government takes big stakes in RBS and HBOS

• Shares still slump on news of no dividends
'PRUDENT, cautious, responsible" and "stable, reliable, solid" – the characteristics of three centuries of Scottish bankers and their banks all seemed instantly vaporised the moment it was announced yesterday that Royal Bank of Scotland and Halifax Bank of Scotland had been forced to collapse into government ownership.

The humiliation of this admission of catastrophic failure, the injury inflicted on national morale, the shame of having to go cap-in-hand to politicians, will reverberate around the nation for years, with as yet incalculable consequences for the political economy of Scotland.

Never before has the country seen the spectacle of two big bank chief executives with, at one time, more practical power at their command than any government minister, forced to depart quietly into the night with not a penny of the severance pay to which they were entitled.

The sense of complete failure is underlined by the fact that these banks are commercial companies, which prided themselves on their independence from government but are now creatures of it.

Though modern society tends to think of banks as a necessary evil, they are deeply interwoven with the history, character and economy of Scottish society and have shaped the nation in more profound ways than is often appreciated.

The Scottish reputation for thrift, for example, stems directly from the Trustee Savings Bank movement, which was founded in 1810 in the parish of Ruthwell, Dumfriesshire, by the Rev Henry Duncan – his memory is commemorated in the name of Lloyds TSB's Scottish headquarters in George Street, Edinburgh.

He was a man who was appalled by the poverty of the time and came to realise that a bank in which poor people could deposit money in good times would help sustain them in years of famine and poverty.

But the commercial banks of the time required a deposit of £10 to open an account, a sum well beyond the hopes of ordinary labourers, whose wages were counted in pennies not pounds. His solution was to create a bank where sixpence was enough to begin saving.

His iron rule, based on the three years he had spent working for a bank in Liverpool and a departure from the practices of poor-relief charitable movements of the time, was to insist that the bank would operate as a business and not as a charity.

To persuade the naturally suspicious parishioners that their money was safe, he showed off the chest in which their cash would be kept. It had three locks, with keys entrusted to three different trustworthy people – the trustees in the name of the movement.

The bank was an immediate success. In its first year, it attracted £151 in deposits, which were entrusted to the Linen Bank in Dumfries in order to earn 5 per cent interest.

The Rev Duncan, far right, laid down strict rules: "Every depositor must lodge to the amount of four shillings at least within the year, under the penalty of one shilling. Interest at the rate of five per cent is allowed to every depositor who continues a member of the bank for three years; but such as withdraw the whole of their deposits before that period receive only four per cent."

And failure to attend the annual meeting meant a fine of sixpence.

No mean publicist (the Rev Duncan founded the Dumfries and Galloway Standard newspaper to spread the message of his banking cause), he made sure that news of his innovation spread far and wide. More Trustee Savings Banks followed in Scotland, then England, then Europe and even the United States. Within ten years, the money deposited in British TSBs totalled £3 million.

If the TSB movement went a long way to alleviate poverty, the business of the Bank of Scotland and Royal Bank of Scotland was to create wealth. The Bank of Scotland was created in 1695, the only institution founded under an act of the pre-1707 Scottish Parliament to survive into modern times.

It arrived at a time of economic distress. Famines, called the "seven ill years" in Jacobite propaganda, had begun to afflict all of northern Europe as a result of a climatic downturn. Scottish merchants, anxious to trade with England and further afield, found the credit they needed for such work hard to find.

The Scottish currency, too, was unreliable, and merchants preferred to deal with English sterling, which was difficult and time-consuming with London being several days' ride away.

The arrival of the Bank of Scotland began to fix these problems. One problem it fixed was a lack of coins, particularly gold coins, which were being used by the English government to finance war against France.

The bank began experiments with paper currency, backed by its capital, which could be passed as payment from trader to merchant – they soon became sure in the knowledge that the paper note was always redeemable for hard cash at the bank's offices.

The creation of reliable currency and credit facilities did much to finance Scotland's growth during the industrial revolution. Steel mills, shipyards and engineering foundries all required vast sums of money to be created. Scottish banks provided much of it. Among the beneficiaries was Robert Owen, whose New Lanark cotton mill experiment in enlightened manufacturing was financed by Royal Bank of Scotland.

Paper currency was a major innovation that spread rapidly to the rest of Europe – an invention which founded the Scots' reputation for being clever and inventive with money.

There is a long list of inventions: 1728 – Royal Bank of Scotland invents the overdraft; 1750 – British Linen Bank, now part of HBOS, develops the first retail bank branch network; 1777 – Royal Bank of Scotland creates the world's first coloured bank notes; 1826 – Royal Bank of Scotland prints the first double-sided banknotes in an effort to thwart the counterfeiter; 1875 – the Chartered Institute of Bankers in Scotland, the world's first banking institute, is established; 1946 – National Bank of Scotland, now part of RBS, develops world's first mobile bank; 1959 – Bank of Scotland is the first UK bank to computerise its processing of bank accounts; 1972 – Royal Bank of Scotland is the first UK bank to offer house purchase loans; 1986 – Bank of Scotland launches world's first remote banking service; 1997 – Royal Bank of Scotland is the first British bank to announce a fully fledged internet banking service; 2005 – Clydesdale Bank is the first UK bank to offer ATM speech technology for the visually impaired.

Throughout, the two main banks have been shaped by, and have shaped, the country's politics.

In its early days, the Bank of Scotland was suspected, somewhat unfairly, of Jacobite sympathies. Although it kept its deposits away from the Old and Young Pretenders in the 1715 and 1745 rebellions by securing the money in Edinburgh Castle, its treasurer, David Drummond, was also treasurer of a fund raised to pay for the defence of Jacobite prisoners from the '15.

Yet the suspicions of treasonable activity were enough to help persuade monied Edinburgh Whigs of the early 18th century that the bank should have a loyal competitor. Hence the "royal" in the title of Royal Bank of Scotland, founded in 1727.

The seeds for the expansion of Scottish banks internationally were laid by the discovery of North Sea oil. The Bank of Scotland was in the lead, taking a share in providing the £360 million needed to finance the exploitation of the giant BP Forties field. The project's viability was based on the assumption that the oil was worth $4 a barrel.

Many more such ventures, and profits, for the banks followed.

This internationalisation led to the bankers' eyes opening on far horizons which – as Royal Bank of Scotland in particular began acquiring banks in the US after it beat the Bank of Scotland to buy National Westminster in 2000 – turned Scottish banking into a global player.

So why did it go so wrong? In short, it was because the Scottish banks believed the same things as did nearly everybody else; that the world had moved into an era of cheap credit, low inflation and steady growth. They believed that Wall Street, through the invention of such things as collateralised debt obligations – incredibly complex parcels of mortgages and other loans – had found new ways of raising sums that could be used to finance yet more lending.

Enthusiastically embracing derivatives trading, they believed the risks involved in this new finance could be laid off by yet more complicated mechanisms called credit default swaps. They also believed the international monetary markets would provide them with the billions in loans needed to keep this complicated business going.

To be fair, save for a few dissenting voices here and there, no-one saw how it could all unravel.

But unravel it did, as the subprime mortgage defaults in the US more than a year ago turned from a trickle into an avalanche, and the collateralised debt obligations turned into liabilities.

Should Messrs Goodwin and Hornby have foreseen these problems? Perhaps. Should they have been more prudent? Maybe. Were they and their executives so entranced by the bonuses to be won from immediate profit that they ignored questions of long-term financial viability? Possibly.

The reckoning on these questions will come, but for the moment, the urgent need is to rebuild. It could, after all, have been a lot worse. The two banks are still there, albeit with the government sitting in their boardrooms. The people who have built up the relationships of trust on which banking business depends are still there, though the trust needs some repairing.

Among the debris of battered trust lies the dictum that Sir George Mathewson drummed into his executives: that in order to retain the loyalty of RBS's army of shareholders, they had to deliver a steady stream of dividends. Now shareholders have to wait perhaps four to five years until the government's shareholding is redeemed before their dividends resume.

Scotland has been hit by the blast of the hurricane. But unlike Wall Street, where the vast and mighty investment banks have been whipped away, or Iceland, whose 320,000 people and £10 billion of annual GDP are weighed down by the huge burden of £50 billion of debt, Scotland's banks have not been levelled flat.

If the people who take charge of the banks now can show the prudence, innovation and enterprise of their forebears, the industry will rise and be a power again.

Brought to their knees in £31.5bn rescue deal

Shareholders count cost of bail-out deal

The 'boy from Paisley' who found himself at centre of a global storm

Bill Jamieson: Government's rescue plan cloaks what will be a financial Culloden

Brown calls for new Bretton Woods pact


Q&A: Government takes preference over dividend payouts in return for helping sector to stabilise

How will the deal work?

The UK Treasury is injecting £37 billion into three high-street banks – Royal Bank of Scotland, HBOS and Lloyds TSB. The aim is to give the banks the capital they need to get back to normal trading and restore confidence in the industry.

How much is each getting?

For RBS, the government will buy £5 billion of preference shares and another £15 billion of ordinary shares if, as many expect, the bank is unable to find willing private investors.

HBOS will get £11.5 billion from taxpayers, made up of £8.5 billion in ordinary shares and £3 billion in preference shares, while Lloyds TSB is to get £5.5 billion, £4.5 billion in ordinary shares and £1 billion in preference shares.

Barclays has said it is to raise £6.5 billion of new capital from private investors rather than going to the government. Barclays also said it would scrap its final-dividend payout for this year, saving it £2 billion.

What are preference shares and what are ordinary shares?

Preference shares, as the name suggests, rank ahead of ordinary shares. The Treasury will earn 12 per cent a year – a good deal for the taxpayer. Until the preference shares are paid off, ordinary shares will not get a dividend, which could take several years.

How were the amounts of money arrived at?

Under guidance from the Financial Services Authority, the government negotiated with the banks.

Banks were asked how much they would need to make sure their capital assets represented 8 per cent of their loans.

In banking, capital assets represent the combined total of physical assets and shares. The banking standard is to have capital assets that represent 8 per cent of the loan book, but the government wanted them to be over-capitalised so each was given more than enough to hit that target. RBS has been given enough to take its asset capital ratio to 11. 5 per cent, while the new merged HBOS Lloyds TSB bank will have an asset capital ratio of 8.5 per cent.

Where is the government getting the money from?

To get the money for the rescue package, the government will have to borrow from the international money markets in the form of a government gilt auction – just like the US government does for its own $700 billion bail-out plan.

Were there any strings attached to the investment?

Yes, ministers have stipulated certain conditions – no bonus will be awarded to any board member for 2008, and any bonuses earned in 2009 will be paid in shares.

No dividend will be paid on ordinary shares until the government's preference shares have been repaid. Also, RBS and Lloyds TSB/HBOS have promised they will maintain mortgage lending and small-business lending at 2007 levels.

Will this part of the deal actually work?

The Treasury said last night it was confident that it would work, primarily because the government now has representation on the boards of the banks and because, as a major shareholder, it is able to exert influence at that level as well.

The full article contains 2353 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Nevsky,

Moscow 14/10/2008 00:04:16
Thanks goodness Europe and the US came to the rescue of the UK. However what the past two weeks have shown is how vulnerable a small country like the UK is in the world; one week more of being squeezed and the country would have almost certainly gone bankrupt!

Only through borrowing money from foreign markets and the intervention of Europe has staved off a failing UK the UK simple does not have the cash to deal with the magnitude of this kind of problem.

Seems the Irish got it right thankfully, cost them not a penny and the their banking system is ranked higher than that of the UK; well done Ireland, seems like the UK will be paying for the next ten years!

2

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 14/10/2008 00:05:37

'Aye' The 'forefathers' will be,...
.....'turning-in-their-graves,

However the whole scenario will affect the, 'Heart of London's' trade centre and dwindle to the USA.
3

Nevsky,

Moscow 14/10/2008 00:05:59
We should also thank Gordon who has wined and dined the bankers for 11 years and got us into this mess; nice to know that he could borrow £500 billion of taxpayers money to dave his reputation...well done!

Guiness anyone?
4

subrosa,

14/10/2008 00:18:12
# 1

There are quite a few countries smaller than Scotland who have survived this quite well.

Gordon Brown and George Bush have brought us to this and both the US and UK are the worst off. The rest of Europe is managing better.

The whole story of bringing down Scotland's banks will not be told for at least another generation. Obviously then it'll be too late to punish the perpetrators but we know who they are.

"I'll do anything to ensure Scotland stays within the Union." Indeed he will.
5

Nevsky,

Moscow 14/10/2008 00:32:34
4 Sub#

What seems impossible to me is that Brown had no knowledge as to the dangers he was taking in encouraging the markets.

He must have known how reliant the UK was on the American markets and he must also have known that is the US wobbled then the knock-on effect here would be very very severe.

Personally i do not think he forsaw ever having to borrow money from foreign markets to stop the entire UK banking sector going down the tubes; this has to be the biggest miscalculation in financial history by a UK chancellor.

His legacy will be the near destruction of Scottish Banking and the largest public debt the UK has ever had; i simply cannot believe that a chancellor was not aware of the risks!

6

EPS,

Edinburgh 14/10/2008 00:34:22
For nearly 300 years Bank of Scotland was a model of prudence. The thrift of the bank and the thrift of the Scottish nation developed in partnership. If Bank of Scotland had remembered that prudence from the 1970s onwards and not followed the crowd, it would be independent still and all the stronger for it.
7

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 14/10/2008 00:37:22


subrosa ~4,

As I have said in many a post on these forums,...

Scotland are the 'Under-Dogs'

Always have been, and Always, will be!

And with embarrassment's like Alex Salmond to,..

...'Rule-our-Roost'

We the Scots will never do any better, better start,...

...'Flying-the-Flag' of Poland from Edinburgh Castle!
8

Robbie 2,

NZ 14/10/2008 00:43:09
4 subrosa,
There are quite a few countries smaller than Scotland who have survived this quite well.
As posted before but relevant to the doctrine of trustee banks:
- two small ‘New Zealand-owned banks shrug off global credit crunch’
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10499515
Of course it may or will affect NZ but there a more important things afoot if one can believe the Kiwi media, such as Olympic Gold medallists, the Swindell twins are retiring from competitive rowing - the nations is I mourning. Bank crises that’s ’over there’ (at least at present)
9

Evolution in action,

St Andrrews 14/10/2008 00:44:25

NEXT!!!!
10

Bring it Off,

UK 14/10/2008 00:52:03
"I will not allow house prices to get out of control and put at risk the sustainability of the recovery."
Gordon Brown's 1997 Budget Statement

"Under this Government, Britain will not return to the boom and bust of the past."
Pre-Budget Report, 9th November 1999

"Britain does not want a return to boom and bust."
Budget Statement, 21 March 2000

"So our approach is to reject the old vicious circle of the...the old boom and bust."
Pre-Budget Report, 8 November 2000

"Mr Deputy Speaker we will not return to boom and bust."
Budget Statement, 7 March 2001

"As I have said before Mr Deputy Speaker: No return to boom and bust."
Budget Statement, 22 March 2006

"And we will never return to the old boom and bust."
Budget Statement, 21 March 2007

Aye right pal on ye go GORDON
11

SkeptikScot,

14/10/2008 01:08:42
For me the only thing Scottish about RBS and HBOS was in the name and the fact they provided jobs here. As far as I know both the name and some of the jobs are staying - so no big disaster.

As a (slightly puritanical) Scot, I feel they had long since lost any quality I particularly admired - they were just another bank - the banking equivalent of McDonalds.

And there is always the remote possibility that Lloyds/HBOS megabank will eventually sell off B of S and it could return to its 'prudent, cautious, responsible, stable, reliable, solid' Scottish ways. If it didn't do this I'd have no particular respect for it.
12

Dougie McGill,

Edinburgh 14/10/2008 01:39:07
This is the financial equivalent of the 1978 World cup campaign.
13

!Ya basta!,

14/10/2008 03:23:08
I don't think it is fair to blame Brown for this, though he has to accept some responsibility. If he had called for additional regulation of the banking sector can you imagine the outcry?

It is clear where the real blame lies. Yet again, it is the free marketeers, the laissez faire capitalists, the neoliberals, the trade liberalisers etc.

Free markets are an ideology, they don't really exist and unbounded, they not only don't work, they are incredibly destructive. We need regulation, but not over regulation. The private sector can not exist without the public sector and there needs to be more political and media recognition of this. Once again we see public subsidy, private profit. If we don't learn this lesson and step back from what I sincerely hope is the high water market of neoliberalism, this will happen again and the West will be bankrupt. Then of course we will have war.

In the end, even Neocons don't care about ideology, all they really care about is power (as the resuce package demonstrates - which goes against all their so-called "principles" and basically uses public money to maintain the current system).

This crisis will shake itself out into a revised world order which has a chance of being a benefit to the whole world. A less unipolar world with more say for Russia, China, India and developing countries must be good. The West is weakened by this and I hope the developing world exploits our weakness in a peaceful but forceful way to redress the current huge imbalance in power and subsidising of the northern rich by the southern poor.

Sadly, terrorists of various hues are going to be emboldened by this. Just as the USSR went bankrupt because of arms escalation, so the US may follow, in fact this has always been the Al Quaida strategy. Many previous empires have gone bankrupt by over extending themselves.

In my opinion, the way to combat this is a return to the enlightenment vaues that launched modernity and some true democracy, not t
14

!Ya basta!,

14/10/2008 03:24:44
In my opinion, the way to combat this is a return to the enlightenment vaues that launched modernity and some true democracy, not the sham democracy we have now.

But this will only happen if people push for it, and nobody in the West has cared enough so far because we are too busy consuming. Change is much more likely to come from developing countries where huge numbers of people have been marginalsied by "globalisation".

What we are seeing now is a shift in global power relations not seen since WWII. And because history is about action and power in the context of ideology, nobody knows how it will turn out but we should all play our part.
15

Dougie Douglas,

Brisbane 14/10/2008 04:22:01
#1 - Nevsky - spot on.

Don't be kidded into thinking that this whole episode has been caused by forces outside of Brown's control. The regulatory buck has stopped at him for years - he has blundered in a massive way.

This whole affair has a certain whiff about it.

No hope of the hootsman journalists getting to the bottom of it though.

16

,

14/10/2008 04:34:34
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
17

Leonard,

Grays 14/10/2008 05:07:40
It was a sad day when TSB ceased to be the working man's bank, a great bank made in Scotland, a sad sad day.
18

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 14/10/2008 05:34:56
"Scotland has been hit by the blast of the hurricane. But unlike Wall Street, where the vast and mighty investment banks have been whipped away, or Iceland, whose 320,000 people and £10 billion of annual GDP are weighed down by the huge burden of £50 billion of debt, Scotland's banks have not been levelled flat."

The vast and mighty investment banks have not been whipped away. The only one that actually went Bankrupt was Lehman. This was the biggest mistake of this crisis that has not yet fully played out, more Banks may go to the wall when they have to honour the Credit Default Swaps on Lehmans bonds. As for the Other Might Investment Banks, Bear Sterns and Merril Lynch were bought out and Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley are still there, independent, but changed their regulatory status of full fledged deposit taking Banks.

It is only in the UK and Iceland that every bank has hit the wall and 75% of them Nationalized. I don't count HSBC because it is not, Majority UK owned, a Majority UK Operation and its Parent is actually in Hong Kong even if its Head Office has been in London since it purchased Midland Bank in 1993.

I don't see how Iceland is in any a worse spot than the UK given that UK GDP is $2.7 Trillion and External Debt stands at $10.3 Trillion giving you a GDP to Debt Ration of 490%, which is only marginally better than Icelands Ration of 500%.

Obviously the Authorities in London are either incapable or unwilling to properly regulate the Banks. I hope this is a wake up call for the people of Scotland to demand that the regulation of Banks in Scotland be devolved to the Scottish Government.
19

terry osser,

morden 14/10/2008 05:44:54
500 billion just to win glenrothes seems a tad too much
20

Bring it Off,

UK 14/10/2008 05:50:01
It was also clear that the subprime-mortgage crisis was brought about by too much liquidity, easy credit and inadequate government regulation.

AND WHO WAS RUNNING THE TREASURY DURING THIS TIME?
21

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 14/10/2008 06:09:24
Our banks became lions led by teenage numpties.
22

Cappo Del Monte,

14/10/2008 06:57:12
A quick quetion for all you banking guru's, I admit I have never been a great investor ( although I have never bought banking shares , thankfully ) but if Lloyds TSB ane going cap in hand to liebour for extra cash, how in the big ones name can they possibly buy out HBOS> They have no money, no one will lend them money, also they did make a deal at that price re-negociation should never happen
23

JSM,

ni3sh5mz 14/10/2008 07:06:24
BOS had ceased to be a Scottish run bank when it was merged and the senior jobs went to the Haliban. RBOS was brought low by management arrogance - apparently Fred had to be "persuaded" not to take the huge payoff he thought was his due !!!
GB is enjoying a "bounce" at present but don't forget who was Chancellor for ten years - it was on his watch that this whole mess brewed up
24

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta CA for more WAR VOTE McCain 14/10/2008 07:22:52
Dudes,

In a giant global economy there is no spot for a micro Independent Scotland.

Its a dream based on ignoring reality and facts.

But in every wannabe target the supporters , in this case the polarized SNP cannot see reality and manipulate facts to dream on.

At the miss-stroke of a WALL Street minute, economies around the world come crashing down . stopping centimeters short of financial armageddon.

Quite Ur dream dudes, and get real . There will be no Independent Scotland while people need jobs to live by.

Happy Haggis day

GC





25

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta CA for more WAR VOTE McCain 14/10/2008 07:24:27
# 26 correction

For Quite ...read..Quit

GC
26

Evan Owen,

Snowdonia 14/10/2008 07:27:46
No severance pay? Would you care if you still got a £500,000 per annum pension? Most of us will be lucky to see £5000.. When you think about the £millions these people have been earning, superhuman wages paid to what is evidently very ordinary people you have to ask why, so here we go, why? I would also like to know why they have paid no price for being wrong, apart from some severance pay. Why is it the regulator hasn't publicly admonished them, fined them and banned them for life, the regulator is quick enough to lay waste to a small firm that didn't tick a few boxes even though nobody lost any money. If this is the fair and reasonable society that so much blood was spilled in the fight to maintain it I am a monkey's uncle, if Darwin was right of course.
27

eric,

14/10/2008 07:30:21
See london is already spinning lies about flash gordon saves the world.just like they did churchill and we all know it was eisehhower and the russians.
28

tommytommy,

14/10/2008 07:37:53
The Brown Plan.

Has saved the Scottish economy from bankrupcy.

Has exposed the SNP case for economic independence.

The situation couldnt have been engineered better by Gordon Brown if he had tried.

A political lifeline that shows him to be the man for the job-allegedly.

The above are a couple of ideas and not necessarily mine.

If you think about it without Gordon Brown the Scottish people might be chasing haggis over the heather today.

The situation without the Union would be dire-or so it seems. Currency in free fall mass unemployment social conflict etc

Scottish politicians might be going cap in hand to the Russians or even the Bank of England to get bailed out.

Nationalism has hit the rocks.Baseless mickey mouse economics divorced from the reality of International Capitalism-or so it seems.

Last thought.

If any good has come out of this economic disaster surely it is the fact that Alex Salmond has been subdued.
29

eric,

14/10/2008 07:40:54
The only people to be be subdued is our children they will be paying a heavy price in taxes for this gvts mistakes,roll on the general election.
30

Guga II,

Rockall 14/10/2008 07:42:55
#5.

With people who have attitudes like yours:

"a bit like Scotland is now no Banks to call there own, all in English hands"

that think all the money stolen from Scotland is the sole property of the English, it is little wonder that more and more people in Scotland want to be completely shot of the yoke of English colonialism.
31

fife runner,

14/10/2008 07:44:53
Goodwin and co. will still get their golden goodbyes as it is in their contract. Shows that in the private sector failure pays.
32

eric,

14/10/2008 07:52:11
33 janis .its overhyped nonsence.
33

tommytommy,

14/10/2008 07:53:11
35

I am no supporter of Gordon Brown but the man behind the plan is Gordon Brown.

Im calling it "The Brown Plan "

It could be argued that The Brown Plan saved the Scottish Economy from the rocks.

I dont want to get Nationalists upset but they have to argue a coherent case against Browns logic or they are finished.

Gordon Brown.The man who saved the Scottish Economy.

Surely that is reality.?

Im only saying what others will say.
34

eric,

14/10/2008 07:54:39
Smaller nations have to do things in a different way,population ,economics dooooh.
35

Nevsky,

Moscow 14/10/2008 07:55:06
35 sm753#

'World adopts British model of bank rescue' yes they are..the model of panic, massive debt and nationalisation.

Guaranteeing banks against each country was the only real way to stop the falling markets and seeing even more banks (if not countries) go to the wall.

One thing is for sure, if the UK had acted alone and Europe had resisted then the UK would have sunk further anf further.

Still the unemployment and economic figures to come out this week, watch the markets fall again as the scale of this debt and the less than optimistic prospects for the future are digested!
36

eric,

14/10/2008 08:03:33
Jobs for the boys .looking out for one another .lifeline .election,!
37

Seymour,

London 14/10/2008 08:07:00
Seems to be only one of the big banks that has not gone cap in hand to the government: HSBC, once the good old Midland Bank. What did they do right, I wonder?
38

Shug,

14/10/2008 08:09:00
Usual Scotland versus England nonsense getting spouted. Fact is that RBS and HBoS (like many other banks) were too greedy, nothing to do with governments. Not Brown's fault, not Bush's fault. The banks see their role as trying to make as much profit as possible for their shareholders, as opposed to trying to prudently and safely look after their customers money. I have no sympathy for any shareholder who has lost money. Hopefully we will see a rise in more local mutual society's where people can hopefully invest their savings in a much safer fashion
39

eric,

14/10/2008 08:11:12
Glasgow savings bank .Bank of Caledonia.Bank of Alba.:)
40

Egg Chasing Ape,

14/10/2008 08:20:34
I find it amazing how billions of pounds of taxpayer’s money is happily offered up to save these institutions that have been the subject of so much miss-management, without reference to the electorate or taxpayer. The chief execs disappear with massive pensions while the man in the street whose life may have been destroyed by their practises loses out and when he can't pay his mortgage won't get any leeway from said institutions (which his money has bailed out) before they foreclose on him. With public money taking such a large part of these banks surely public interest has to be served!

41

It's me!,

14/10/2008 08:20:51
This is what happens when you put an English grocer in charge of a Scottish bank.
42

Geo_1875,

Edinburgh 14/10/2008 08:24:28
#37 TommyTommy

So why couldn't an Independent Scotland have gone cap in hand to the IMF and put itself in record debt for a generation to save Scottish banks? Is that something only Browntrousers is allowed to do on behalf of the Union?
43

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 14/10/2008 08:33:04
'PRUDENT, cautious, responsible" and "stable, reliable, solid" –

These are Scottish characteristics not British characteristics. British characteristics run in to rip off, take as much as you can and give a little as possible back.
Which is exactly why we are where we are now. We were heading no where else with this business ethic.
44

Bigwull,

edinburgh 14/10/2008 08:38:18
Still no one has told me what happened to all the massive profits these banks have been robbing from us over the last 10 years and now we have to bail out, surely those that received these payouts should be hit first? And when will British firms realise American accounting practises are shocking and not get involved in that market, it's been the graveyard for many a good firm over the years. I also think this is the beginning of the end for the USA as the worlds superpower, they are in a very similar position to we were in the 1930's broke and still trying to be the worlds policeman, I just hope the next superpower is as benevolent towards Western Europe, but I doubt it.
45

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 14/10/2008 08:38:37
5

What a load of cr*p. The English raped and pillaged a large chunk of the world and what have they given back?
division and sectarian seperation.
Nae wonder nobody will vote for our Eurovision song entries they think we are all English.
46

Ugly George,

14/10/2008 08:46:55
46 its me
"This is what happens when you put an English grocer in charge of a Scottish bank."

Fred Goodwin was born near Paisley and worked in Edinburgh. How does that make him an "English grocer"?
47

camster,

Glasgow 14/10/2008 08:47:26
The problem of the banks seems to be an Edinburgh problem. Too many big egos who think they can rule the world. Edinburgh is getting more like London every day.

On the Irish banks I suggest if you have money with them take it out. A massive exposure to property and the USA is not a heathly place to be.
48

Highland Mist,

14/10/2008 08:48:32
"Never before has the country seen the spectacle of two big bank chief executives with, at one time, more practical power at their command than any government minister, forced to depart quietly into the night with not a penny of the severance pay to which they were entitled."

ABOUT TIME TOO - THE BONUSES THAT HAVE BEEN PAID OUT TO BANKERS, AT ALL LEVELS, IN THESE BANKS, JUST TO DO THEIR JOBS OVER THE LAST DECADE HAS BEEN COMPLETE DAYLIGHT ROBBERY. THE BRANCH MEMBERS BEING SENT ON TRIPS ALL OVER THE WORLD AT REGULAR INTERVALS FOR OVERSELLING DEBT TO PEOPLE WHO DO NOT NEED AND CANNOT AFFORD TO TAKE ON MORE DEBT, BONUSES OF £THOUSANDS BEING PAID OUT TO YOUNGSTERS AT THE BANK FRONT DOORS TRYING TO SELL CREDIT CARDS TO PEOPLE WHO SHOULD NOT BE TAKING THEM. SELLING DEBT AND SELLING DREAMS OF UNATAINABLE PROSPERITY AND LAND OWNERSHIP TO THE POOR WHO WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO PAY UNLESS IT KEEPS ON COMING TO THEM VIRTUALLY FREE. WELL NOW IT HAS STOPPED. THESE MEN SHOULD NOT SIMPLY BE SACKED WITHOUT THEIR SEVERANCE, THEY SHOULD BE HAULED BEFORE THE COURTS AND THE GOVERNMENT TO ANSWER FOR WHAT THEY HAVE DONE TO THIS NATION AND ITS PEOPLE. AND THE POLITICIANS SHOULD BE ASKED WHY IT WAS ALLOWED TO CONTINUE, IT HAS BEEN ON THE CARDS FOR YEARS. GREED HAS BROUGHT DOWN THE BANKING SYSTEM AND IT HAS BEEN A VERY LONG TIME COMING.
49

eric,

14/10/2008 08:51:40
At least london has shiney new skyline to show for the greed .Edinburgh is looking more like Blackpool of the north.You cant buy class,
50

Courtney,

East Molesey 14/10/2008 08:55:33
One of the main reasons that the "Scottish" banks have collapsed is that they had non bankers at the helm and in particular BoS had a cornflakes salesman, Andy Hornby, directing operations. No matter how bright a person is it is experience that counts. One size does not fit all!
51

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 14/10/2008 08:58:56
55 Courtney
"One of the main reasons that the "Scottish" banks have collapsed is that they had non bankers at the helm"

Fred Goodwin has worked in banking throughout his career.
52

Highland Mist,

14/10/2008 08:59:16
#37, TommyTommy, you are absolutely correct. Gordon Brown has saved all our skins by his intervention and insistance that the world follows his lead. As soon as he had worked out what the heck was going on he devised a program of rescue and implemented it. Has put his opposite number in Parliament and Salmond in Edinburgh has been made to look a bit of a bumbling economic fool with his previous comments of Irish and Icelandic wealth. WE can all count our blessings that this sorry episode will lead to one thing - an end to the bizarre parochial notion of Scottish Independence from the rest of the UK - we are, and should be and need to be, one nation, each part is dependant on the other.

The Brown Plan has saved us all - it will go down in history as having done so (the US is now also taking his lead). Perhaps his economic astuteness comes naturally - he does come from the same town as Adam Smith - maybe we should call this "The Wealth of Nations Revisited" ?!
53

Walter Ego,

Durness 14/10/2008 08:59:27
These banks are no more Scottish than Alex Salmond in a kilt. They are global enterprises owned (until now) by other global enterprises. We should not be shedding one tear for their demise. Let us save our sympathy for the people (Scottish and non Scottish) who will lose their jobs.
54

Voice of reason,

EDINBURGH 14/10/2008 09:02:06
57 rubbish - America saved the world . Brown got us into this mess in the UK with lies about the state of the economy and voters fell for it .
55

subrosa,

14/10/2008 09:03:23
#6

Nevsky I couldn't have put that better myself.
56

Doh,

14/10/2008 09:11:00


300 years of prudent banking destroyed in 20 years of unregulated greed.

Well done Thatcher and Brown.
57

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 14/10/2008 09:13:50
6 Nevski/60 Subrosa
You should not assume that everything is fine with the Irish banks. The share price of them was also taking a hammering last week ant the Irish govt's move has been seen my many as very risky. The Irish Independent newspaper said that Ireland was playing a "very high stakes game of poker"

Also look at tthis quote from Bloomberg

"The perceived risk of a bond default by Ireland surged to a record after the government said it will guarantee the deposits and borrowings of six lenders".
58

Alan B,

14/10/2008 09:21:05
Given the mess Brown has got the economy into he must resign. It is becoming a joke now.

We will suffer a major recession made alot worse due to his incompetence.

If one bank suffers you can blame the management. If the whole sector suffers you blame the whole regulatory framework that allowed this mess to occur.
59

The Strategist,

14/10/2008 09:23:23

If you drive a car off a cliff into the sea you have two choices. Stay in it and drown or kick out the window and get out. There is no third choice...

All Brown has done is take the most obvious choice but lets not forget shall we that it was Brown driving the car in the first place.

60

Alan B,

14/10/2008 09:24:22
#Highland Mist

Brown will go down in history as a bumbling fool.

Noone with any credibility or any economic knowlegde will absolve him of his responsibility in this crisis. It is becoming embarrassing for the uk internationally now to still have Brown bumbling through this mess.
61

OldTom,

14/10/2008 09:25:04
Nevsky # 1

I'm afraid your fairy tale view of Ireland is misplaced...very misplaced.

Their banks were on the verge of collapse a couple of weeks ago and the Irish government bailed them out to the tune of €400 billion. Now if you are prepared to look at things objectively that is €400 billion which the Irish State does not have!!!! And all this from a country whose population is less than 5 million. Just imagine how much debt Ireland is in now. If you can bear it that is!!!

The €400 billion is much much more than the UK has used to bail out the UK banks whose target market is over 60 million. That shows you the scale of Ireland's problems.

Brian Lenihan is making his budget statement today and it is expected to be the harshest in Irish History with thier public deficit running into tens of billions and house prices plummenting. Many developers are going to the wall with umpteen buildings scarring the Dublin skyline unfinished. In other words, the €400 billion has been brought on by greed, arrogance and stupidity on behalf of their banks and the politicians.

It now leaves Ireland with an unfinished infrastructure, a third world health service and a failing education system with no money to pay for it.

At least in Scotland, even though your problem has been compounded by arrogant bankers and London's bitterness, still has a good infrastructure, a damn good health service and a wonderful education system as well as a whole host of companies leading the way with world class R&D

How's that for a portrayal!!!

62

Alan B,

14/10/2008 09:27:38
#OldTom

"How's that for a portrayal!!!"

A dream. Pity we are in the middle of a nighmare.
63

"Hoots" Fandango,

Hamilton 14/10/2008 09:34:30
^Hoots~, Bandana

Like the moniker! Are we cousins?
64

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 14/10/2008 09:41:29
I feel that many of the comments by both the media and individuals are indulging in being wise after the event. When RBS and Fred Goodwin were pursuing their aggressive expansion the perceived opinion in Scotland seemed to be that this was a good thing. A company with its HQ in Edinburgh was becoming one of the big players in world banking thus showing how Scotland with its expertise in banking could be a modern world economy.

Now that that aggressive campaign has gone belly up everybody seems to be saying that this is as a result of eschewing the safe traditional and responsible banking practices and also the fault of lax regulation.
65

AJ Fife,

14/10/2008 09:46:46
How come Broon, the "greatest ever Chancellor Britain has ever known", presided over all this. You would have thought with his "safe pair of hands" and his "wise and prudent approach", Broon could have avoided the nationalisation of Scotland's banking system!

Maybe he still is a pretendy Marxist like he was in his student days and it was his cunning plan all along!!

Can't see old 'bushy brows' Darling saving the day either.
66

Southsea,

Edin. 14/10/2008 09:47:21
For 11 years (at least!) there has been a failure of government to monitor an regulate until the point of disaster. Government has been intimately involved throughout, for example, just who recommended Sir Fred for his title – Gordon Brown.

The underlying issue I fear is a perpetual papering over difficult issues for short term perceptions required for elections. Gorgon may have managed to consolidate these debts, there is clearly a vast remaining amount of public debt built over the last decade, the off book PFI stuff etc. Just don't even look at the balance of trade and services over the last decade and what this means.

At some point the music must stop, Browns immediate problem is timing an election before then so that the stains in the fresh wallpaper are not obvious to even the most naively optimistic.
67

tommytommy,

14/10/2008 09:52:13
47

Yes a Scottish Govt. could have done that among other things.

The argument for Nationalism is that it is said to offer the people a better standard of living.Control over their economy.

Everywhere we see economies being devestated by the global downturn.It doesnt seem to distinguish between economies.

It is a fact of Capitalism that bust follows boom.

Here in Scotland the economy has gone bust and it is our good fortune that "The Brown Plan" has saved the ordinary people from a breadline existence.
If you think it is bad now imagine what life inside a bankrupt economy would be like.

The return of the hunter gatherer economy.

Nationalism seems to have hit the rocks.

I havent read a coherent argument for Nationalism in this economic climate but I'm open to being convinced.
68

Alan B,

14/10/2008 10:04:18
#OldTom

In your dream world slagging of Ireland the reality is.

While Ireland has made mistakes and will suffer in this global downturn over the past 20yrs transformed itself from a poor country to one of the richest in the world. Richer than all the other big countries of europe.

Ireland has transformed in that period its job market giving its citizens are much better standard of living. People that used to leave Ireland for a better life have returned as Ireland was transformed into a hihger wage high skilled economy.

Compare that to scotland. We have grown slowly over the last 30yrs and consideribly slower than Ireland. Our young skill people still have to leave the country to find good jobs. Scotland has many more jobs now than 20yrs ago but most are low paid.

You talk of scotlands infrastructure. What? We have no motorway from Edinburgh south to England. It is not even dual carriage way. We have not complete motorway between or 2 major cities in Glas and Edin. And we do not have a motorway north to Aberdeen. The A9 is not even dual carriage way. Ireland while starting with a poor infrasture as it was a poor country has been investing alot and was transforming its infrasture.

As for the rescue plans of the UK and Ireland. Only time will tell how good they have been. So far Ireland does look to have managed its crisis better than we have. While you look at headline figures of what may if the whole thing came crashing dow. the real figure is what you actually have to pay. ie strong action can tend to avoid the real pain. The Uk has made the same sort of commitment as Ireland but done it in a piece meal manner.

Finally Ireland like the UK have been silly when it came to running up huge debt. Although Ireland was not as irresponsible when it came to public sector deficits. As such both countries will have to pay the price for these economic mistakes.

69

Mallory,

Edinburgh 14/10/2008 10:04:29
#22 says...It was also clear that the subprime-mortgage crisis was brought about by too much liquidity, easy credit and inadequate government regulation.

AND WHO WAS RUNNING THE TREASURY DURING THIS TIME?...

and who was overseeing the pummping up of the US sub-prime market in the 1990s as exemplified by the Freddie and Fannie story?

Hint it wasn't the Bush Administration.

70

Nevsky,

Moscow 14/10/2008 10:04:50
Old Tom and George#

The fact remains that Ireland has not invested one penny of taxpayers money in this crisis yet; a guarantee is exactly that and not an injection of cash so your statement that is is costing the 400 billion euros is wrong; no debt has been called in as yet.

Europe has already stated that no institution will be alllowed to fail and this has in effect stregthened Irelands position and as Cowen stated given them a tool box of further measures to deal with any eventualities; their position looks even stronger today!

Ireland's full participation in Europe has virually guaranteed the survival of all of Irelands banking system!

The UK has in the meantime managed to increase public debt to the highest levels ever recorded and has left half of the banking system as a consequence in complete turmoil with the complete demise of the Scottish banking system.

The full consequences of the bailout are not even known as yet with foreign commercial loans having been taken to bail out the UK as the country cold not afford on it's own to access the level of funds required.

The lesson is that the Irish might have played a masterstroke at no expense to their taxpayers while the consequences are a reduction in banking revenue which will dwindle, tax increases, reduced public spending and the government having to borrow even more money to meet it's current obligations.

The lesson is that just about every small country in Europe has performed better than the UK in this crisis and the worst affected next to Iceland will be Scotland..solely as a consequence of being part of the UK.
71

Publius,

London 14/10/2008 10:05:00
The fall of both HBOS and RBS was precipitated by the credit crunch, but the underlying reasons were different.
HBOS fell because it was a mortgage bank - the last of the mortgage banks - just like Northern Rock and Bradford & Bingley. HBOS's death warrant was signed when it failed to find buyers for its share offering in the spring and the shares were left with the underwriters.
RBS fell because its top brass are megalomaniacs. They paid far too much for a Dutch bank, they conned their shareholders into buying more shares and they still bankrupted their own company.

This suggests that the remedy in each case shold be different. Unlike others on this board I think that RBS has a brighter future than HBOS. When conditions allow RBS should sell off its American interests, insurance companies, train leasing business and some of its city ventures. It should use the money to pay off the government (by buying back the government's shares) and return to being a modest high street bank.

For HBOS the future is very dark. I'm surprised that LloydsTSB hasn't walked away altogether. The government must be applying a lot of pressure.
LloydsTSB could still walk away. It could raise £5.5 billion without going to the government in the same way that Barclays will raise money.
72

Publius,

London 14/10/2008 10:10:17
#76 Nevsky

You are mistaken. RBS was slain by Scots at its own headquarters in Edinburgh ... just like the Icelandic banks were slain by Icelanders in Reykjavic.
73

Alan B,

14/10/2008 10:10:32
#tommytommy

"The argument for Nationalism is that it is said to offer the people a better standard of living.Control over their economy."

Correct.

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

While Scotland has performed poorly the countries I listed above have all performed better than the big EU countries of uk, germany, italy and france with higher gdp per capita ppp. Most have not been as lucky as scotland with oil.

As such we really have to seriously ask
1)why the small countries have done better than the bigger ones in europe.
2)why scotland has done poorly in comparison.

As for this crisis. It really does not matter if you are small or big or independent or not. This crisis is not seriously an argument for independence. This crisis is just about one thing. How well your economy was managed. In many ways you could say that small economies are better managed so are in a better place in this crisis. But we have seen some examples of small countries making big mistakes eg iceland. Big countries are in a slightly better position to bail out big companies.
74

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 14/10/2008 10:10:39
Well I tell you an interesting tale:-

In a meeting a techie suggests a solution to a technical problem that has developed this solution is ignored and rubbished by director with tactical and strategical command and control. A month later during a large fanfare to the company the said director announces the "The Great Plan".

The plan turns out to be the techie solution suggested and rubbished previously.

It is not Browns plan, it's a copy of the nordic banking rescue package used in the early 90's and suggested to be used by the Brown and Darling by none other than the first minister about 6-4 weeks ago.

It's magic.
75

Alan B,

14/10/2008 10:12:09
#76 Nevsky

Good points