Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


T in the Park

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.

Darling under pressure after German savings 100% protected



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: 06 October 2008
ALISTAIR Darling, the Chancellor, was last night under increasing pressure to extend state protection for bank depositors in the UK, after the German government announced it would guarantee all private savings.
In a similar move early this morning, the government of Denmark guaranteed all bank deposits as part of a deal with banks to set up a 35 billion Danish crown (£3.6 billion) liquidation fund.

Yesterday, the German finance ministry confirmed a new 50 billion (£38.5 billion) deal with private banks to bail out the country's second largest commercial property lender, Hypo Real Estate. A ministry statement said the deal would add up to £12 billion in credit to an earlier plan worth £27 billion.

Previously, German finance ministry spokesman Torsten Albig said the decision to offer the savings guarantee represented a new direction to help stabilise the economy. Angela Merkel, Germany's chancellor, said no citizen should fear for the safety of their savings.

Previous moves by Ireland and Greece to guarantee 100 per cent of savings have been criticised by the UK government, which fears savers will switch funds to banks based abroad to benefit from the enhanced protections.

Now the surprise move by Berlin – a day after an EU summit at which Germany, France, the UK and Italy agreed to co-operate on measures to tackle the financial crisis – heaps extra pressure on Mr Darling to follow suit.

Last night, there was speculation at senior levels in the British business community that the government could be forced into making an announcement for the UK, possibly as early as today.

Yesterday, Mr Darling rejected calls for him to tear up his economic rulebook in order to allow the Bank of England to deliver sharp cuts in interest rates. Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat leader, said the German savings guarantee made a common European approach to deposit guarantees "completely unavoidable".

The German initiative comes just days after the Financial Services Authority announced it was extending the cover for savers at banks which fail from £35,000 to £50,000 from next Tuesday, partly in response to a flight of savings to Irish banks.

Ms Merkel vowed she would not let the failure of any company disrupt the country's economy – Europe's biggest.

"We will not allow the distress of one financial institution to distress the entire system," she said. "For that reason, we are working hard to secure Hypo Real Estate."

Chancellor will take action to support banks at risk

ALISTAIR Darling said he was ready to offer further assistance to individual banks that got into difficulties.

The Chancellor said the government was providing generalised support to stabilise the banking sector as a whole, but was also prepared to take action where specific banks were at risk of collapse, as it did with Bradford & Bingley and Northern Rock.

He said the government was ready to take "pretty big steps that we wouldn't take in ordinary times" in order to ensure that Britain gets through the current crisis. But the Chancellor said he would resist pressure to scrap the Bank of England's inflation target to allow for cuts in interest rates, insisting that it was vital to maintain economic discipline even in bad times.

And he indicated that he was ready to let state borrowing rise higher, rather than increase taxes, arguing that now was not the time to take money out of the economy.

Mr Darling said: "It's important to take generalised action as well as being ready to take particular action if you get a particular problem with an individual bank."

The full article contains 601 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 06 October 2008 12:53 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Credit Crunch
 
1

Jim Baxter RIP,

Sai Kung 06/10/2008 01:47:03
There must be thousands of Scots waiting for Darling to act to increase their joint savings protection of 100,000 pounds. I bet they are waiting hopefully in Govan and East Glasgow for this important measure so they can bank their state benefits (tee hee).
Why should the Government always wish to protect the rich of the UK when the majority of the population are totally unaffected by this measure.
2

Forward not Back,

06/10/2008 02:23:20
#1 - because the corporate depositors are the ones keeping banks afloat at the moment. If the banks go under, the government faces an even bigger mess.
3

Ursus arctos horribilis,

06/10/2008 04:39:55
Why should the Government protect individual savings???


Because otherwise there will be a run on the banks as we all queue up to withdraw our meagre savings and stuff it in the mattress and consequently the banking system and the economy will collapse. Moreover most individual savers cannot readily go and buy alternatives like gold bullion therefore we look to our politicians and regulators to protect our savings.

As we supposedly live in a democracy -in which our elected politicians are accountable to the voters the prospect of the above melt-down would not exactly enhance the politicians chances of being re-elected!

I assume people are familar with the principle of fractional reserve banking -banking is in many ways a giant confidence trick with no gold standard to underpin the value of the currency-hence the reason Eire was forced to act last week -reportedly a significant overseas depositor wished to withdraw 1.5billion Euros from the AIB which the bank could not meet. The contagion has now spread but still Brown and Darling dither.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article4870873.ece

As we are all supposed to be part of Europe the lack of any concerted response and the UK Govt dragging its heels-as ever-is disappointing.
4

Pilrig,

Livingston 06/10/2008 05:51:07
Private savings should be protected against Broon and Darling.
We saw what happened with Broon and his pension raid.
5

danielrober,

06/10/2008 07:30:00
I have no idea whats going to happen but one thing is noticeable, the spread of risk adverse culture in some EU countriesis growing.

Its been barely a few years since the spread of good for profits, good for Europe policies across the EU, as factories where closed and imports rose. It seems the majority of those reforms where issued onto people with normal jobs in EU factories.

After this crisis is over, maybe a small case for the expansion of socialism protection. Rather than protecting a few bankers that might have to reform or merge.
6

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 06/10/2008 07:56:55
See how these small, independent, W European nations are crumbling: Ireland, Iceland, Denmark, Belgium, etc. Who's next? Welcome to SNP's ideal world.
7

Ursus arctos horribilis,

06/10/2008 08:36:30
#5& 9 Just as you "thought"-ha ha ha!


Reading the absolute non-stop drivel you post on these forums day after day your "thoughts" could be condensed onto the back of a postage stamp-with plenty of room to spare! This problem is way beyond trying to have a go at Salmond and the SNP and-apparently your (very) limited intellectual capabilities.

So pray tell us what exactly is your "solution" to the problem ?-Everyman for himself, letting the financial system and economy crumble and we all go back to subsistence farming and rearing chickens in the back garden like Penelope Keith in The Good Life!

The chickens are coming home OK but now it appears that they have grown into vultures.
8

Bob M,

Paisley 06/10/2008 08:53:11
#14 - Felicity Kendall surely?
9

Fairfax,

06/10/2008 08:54:21
Dave (12): "The ECB will bail these countries out, just like the BoE will bail us out."

There seems to be little chance of that: the ECB can inject liquidity, but it has no powers to draw on funds from national taxation -- that was the possibility rejected by Britain and Germany at the weekend. At present, each Eurozone state is responsible for its own financial stability.

"isn't it strange that Norway, not part of the EU, is doing away fine?"

It's not lack of EU membership -- Iceland is on the edge of economic collapse, with the beginning of food hoarding -- but the advantage of having had their credit crunch in the early 1990s. See, for example,

http://www.norges-bank.no/templates/article____13822.aspx

Their solution, which was to part-nationalize their banks for several years, looks likely to be our route also, so it's an interesting article.
10

Fairfax,

06/10/2008 09:06:44
"Maybe Fairfax but it's actually the American tax payer that will bail us all out."

Their actions will certainly help, because their system is the heart of the infection, but it will be taxpayers who will recapitalize our banks.

"Yes, we're all dooooomed. Not."

Agreed -- it might be difficult for a few years, but it's not ragnarok.
11

Ursus arctos horribilis,

06/10/2008 09:07:35
#14-I stand corrected-how could I confuse those two???
12

Stephen Cowley,

Edinburgh 06/10/2008 09:55:36
It's remarkable that after the Congress voted down the $700 billion rescue package, the stock market went up. Now, once it is through, the stock market is down (5% as I write).

In both cases, this is the opposite to what the newspapers and politicians almost unanimously predicted.

Could it be that manipulating the market by taking on private sector bad debts is not as great a policy as the consensus view suggests?
13

Nevsky,

Moscow 06/10/2008 10:06:03
Bring them on#

When Salmond called for all savings to be guaranteed you were saying he was living in cloud-cuckoo land and that he was a clown, now, when Germany does it and Salmond has probably been proved right you lose the plot a little and are scrabbling around without any argument.

Very funny to watch, perhaps you should put a little thought into your arguments in the first place instead of making a fool of yourself!
14

mike3,

Midlands 06/10/2008 10:20:01
#1, #3


Er, because a bit further down the line they won't be able to pay benefits either. Now how much did it cost for a loaf of bread in pre war Germany? A million marks or so?
15

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 06/10/2008 10:32:23
22 mike3
It is interesting that you used the Weimar Republic in Germany as an example. An analyst in the Oracle publication used the same example but came to a different conclusion from yours.

He calculated that a move by the UK similar to that in Ireland and Germany would result in potential liabilities of $4.5 trillion for the UK govt. He then said that, if the financial markets went into meltdown as they did in the Wall St crash of 1929, the govt may well have to meet a large proportion of these liabilities but would not have the assets to vover them with the result that Sterling would become worthless and lead to the very situation that occurred in the Weimar Republic - as you said 1,000,000 marks for a loaf of bread.

This is the kind of risk that Germany and Ireland have taken. They have made huge guarantees without the asset base to back them up.
16

danielrober,

06/10/2008 10:54:46
21 Nevsky,Moscow

Its good to his kingship has advised the German leader. Lucky for the EU Alec.S is here to save everyone. But i'm only joking.

This kind of coverage costs money, real money, money taken out of the economy. Ultimately it will come from lower German pensions, less trade missions and thousands of tiny government and commercial functions reduced. After all you can print money, but not value.

German export orders are already falling. I hope the people of Germany do not have to go through Thatcherism. Or for that mater socially conscious Thatcherism as sold by Alec.S (after all he did not mind it economically).

Good luck to Germany i hope this state intervention pays off.
17

Alan B,

06/10/2008 11:40:47
#danielrober

This type of coverage does not necessarily cost money and will in all probability save money.

This type of measure is effectively to reassure people. It is to prevent runs on the banks that are forcing them into bankruptcy. It is the runs on the banks that cost money.

The lesson is good strong firm action is better to prevent a problem than weak dittering. (almost a duplication of the argument for salmond vs brown :) ).

18

Alan B,

06/10/2008 11:49:45
#Ugly George

Are you saying their is $4.5 trillion savings in domestic depositors accounts above the 50G level. The cost of full coverage of all domestic depositors would be the difference between the 50G and the rest of someone deposits. Also the total cost will assume that all banks will fail. However if everyone moves their money into 50G lumps then the governments exposure is the same. As such i think you are over cooking your argument.

Just thought about the issue in a different way. A banks has say 150billion mortages. It has 100 billion deposits. It has funded the extra 50 billion through inter banks loans in the credit markets.

As such who should get their money back first. The shareholders will obviously be last. But should the bank pay back the loan before the depositors get their money back. ie should the law and regulations be changed so people depositing money are guaranteed their money before lenders. At the end of the day the senario i outlined above will mean that banks do have huge assets in the mortages but they are just not liquid. The only loss will come about from defaulters and their house will be repocessed.
19

Ursus arctos horribilis,

06/10/2008 12:29:06
#26 "A banks has say 150billion mortages. It has 100 billion deposits. It has funded the extra 50 billion through inter banks loans in the credit markets."


If only they did enjoy that level of security-and therein lies the problem-at most it has more like 15 billion deposits-the "wonders" of fractional reserve banking.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/frb.html

The other problem is that the "tangible" assets under-pinning all of this- forgetting the CDO's CDS and derivatives for one minute-are mostly in bricks and mortar and a blind man knows these have been allowed to balloon out of all touch with reality.




20

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 06/10/2008 12:47:51
26 Alan B
The figure of $4.5 trillion was the figure of an analyst/economic journalist. The point is that the unlimited guarantees do not just apply to just "domestic depositors", they apply to all deposits and therefore include business and company accounts which may contain millions each. I don't know how he worked it out. $4.5 trillion is approx. £2.5 trillion which is less than double the GDP of the UK. As the figure mentioned for Ireland was reported to be over double their GDP, it doesn't seem to be unrealistic.

The point he was making is that another meltdown of markets a la Wall St in 1929 would wipe out much of the savings/investments/pension funds of millions of people. As a result they would be forced to call upon their savings from other areas (e.g. bank deposits etc.) and many would be in a position where they could not repay their loans. Also, businesses running into trouble would have to call upon these deposits just to stay in business and pay their employees. If this did happen, those govts which have guaranteed the position of their banks could face huge liabilities wihout the assets to cover them.
21

Lianachan,

Highlands 06/10/2008 12:54:31
#21 "bring them on" would blame Salmond for the Holocaust, the Challenger shuttle disaster, the weather and the fact that farts smell if he thought he could get away with it. Just ignore him.
22

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 06/10/2008 13:10:03
21/30
The point about these "unlimited guarantees" is that they are not unlimited guarantees. It is clear that no govt can call upon the assets to meet them if the worst came to the worst.

As I pointed out in previous posts, a real crash (who can be sure it won't happen) would leave those govts dangerously exposed. That is why so many govts are reluctant to provide these guarantees.
23

Robb,

06/10/2008 13:47:34
#1. Nonsense. The reason the government have to act to increase the threshold is simple. If they didn't, and everyone who has savings above the current limit remove their cash and deposit it in foreign banks, our economy will be in trouble. Not to mention the fact that the treasury makes a nice little profit from the tax paid on the interest of these accounts.

It's not a case of protecting the rich either. There must be many savers who wouldn't fall into the "rich" category, but who may have more than £35K, or even £40K deposited in a UK bank, even if it is just for a very short period of time. I know several people, none of whom would be classed as rich, who have, due to the profits made on a house sale, have deposited large amounts in banks for a period of weeks or months while they make arrangements to buy a new home. These are not cash rich people. They simply have a large amount of cash sitting around for a short period of time. If such people cannot have confidence in the fact that their money is safe, they will stick it under the mattress.
24

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 06/10/2008 13:54:36
25 Alan B
"The lesson is good strong firm action is better to prevent a problem than weak dittering. (almost a duplication of the argument for salmond vs brown :)"

What appears to be strong, firm action today can appear to be irresponsible, wreckless action tomorrow.

I am becoming increasingly worried over this whole issue. If offering the guarantees offered by Ireland was such an obvious solution, all countries would have done so by now. However many have not as they appear to be worried by the risks. The added problem is that by acting unilaterally in this way, Ireland may force other countries to follow suit not because it is the right thing to do but to prevent their banks being at a disadvantage compared to those of Ireland.

We can, therefore have countries acting out of a sense of panic. This is hardly the best way to deal with current problems. The EU has to get a grip quickly and (I hope in conjuction with the USA, Canada Japan, Switzerland etc.) get some common agreed, realistic system of security in place. This is the only way to help stabilise the situation. Ad hoc measures by one country (either prompted by short term selfishness or panic) are just going to make things worse.

25

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 06/10/2008 13:59:34
32 Robb
Please read post 33

This is now part of the problem. Countries are being forced into rash decisions against their better judgemat as a panic measure just to stop funds going to other banks in other countries. Once we reach this type of situation things can become very dangerous.
26

danielrober,

06/10/2008 21:39:48
Alan.B

A dozen small European and South East Asian countries have had tremendous difficulties following Germany and Japans economic model. Bail outs such such as this always cost money. This is risk taking backed by hundreds of advisers (that they are not the head of) and institutions. Germany is acting to save millions of jobs and i wish them luck.

The state sector of Scotland following the German government in mildly amusing considering the private sector in Germany is based on the old industrial sector from Northern Britain.

Alec.S, is trying to stop/threaten a bank merger for political grounds, not to save millions of jobs. Very different, jobs (Germany) verse mates (SNP).
27

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 07/10/2008 00:12:35
-- General Salmond's photograph on the wall of every bank and on the face of every note and postage stamp. Don't understand why some people just can't see it coming..

.. because they don't know that legendary "bring it on" has hacked into the innermost secrets of the superpowers' computers and is organising a coup d'ecosse by shutting them down and and landing his alien saucer-fleet now hidden from earthian detection round the back side of the moon on Holyrood Green. The new currency will be called the Ewan; Hologram Tam is secretly designing them from fortress Bar L; this will be the only negotiable lettuce. Existing currencies will be "demonitized" to be exchanged on a 100 to 1 basis provided the citizen/slave/vassel gets micro-chippped and heid-banged.

This disinformation is provided by team jing-bang and may be freely distributed since "ye coudna mak it up".

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

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

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