Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Watchdog says HBOS has enough cash to stand alone

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: 16 October 2008
ONE of the most high-profile figures in the UK financial world has indicated HBOS could survive as an independent bank.
Hector Sants, the head of the watchdog the Financial Services Authority (FSA), said all banks now had enough capital – suggesting the Scottish institution could continue without the controversial Lloyds TSB takeover.

Mr Sants – speaking yesterday after an Edinburgh lunch hosted by Scottish Financial Enterprise and the Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce – said he was "conscious of the extraordinary nature of the events over the last couple of days".

"The immediate issue for companies has not been their capital. No-one has run out of capital. The problems with liquidity were do to with the drying-up of wholesale money markets."

He said the FSA was responsible for ensuring it was content with the amount of capital the banks held. And he said it was obvious the authority was "content with the capital being raised by HBOS".

SNP MSP Alex Neil, who has been critical of the deal since it was first put on the table, said: "The genie is out of the bottle. It is quite clear from what the chief executive of the Financial Services Authority has said that HBOS is a viable bank to operate independently. He has blown the case for the merger out of the water completely."

The development came as more high-profile voices raised their concerns about the deal and backed The Scotsman's drive to clarify the details before rushing into it. The Scotsman is concerned the deal is turning into a shotgun wedding and wants to ensure all possibilities are examined before it is consummated.

Dan Macdonald, the chief executive of leading property developer Macdonald Estates, said he was "in total agreement" with The Scotsman.

Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman, said: "There is a danger they are just going to go through with it because that was what they convinced themselves to do. But now it is not obvious that it is the course of action we should be pursuing."

And Tavish Scott, the leader of the Liberal Democrats in Scotland, said: "I am delighted that The Scotsman is also campaigning to save HBOS for Scotland. As your editorial points out, there is still time to save this Scottish institution."

Meanwhile, Alistair Carmichael, MP, called for the Scottish affairs select committee to examine the proposed takeover in the light of the new options created by the Treasury's Bank Reconstruction Fund.

Jim Spowart, a leading businessman who has raised concerns about the deal, told The Scotsman afterwards: "My gist is there is sufficient capital in that business (HBOS] that it could stand alone, on its own."

• The leading group of eight countries, the G8, has backed Gordon Brown's call for an international summit on the financial crisis and to renew stalled global trade talks.

Support for the Prime Minister came yesterday while he was in Brussels trying to seek consensus with other European leaders. He said the summit should involve the US, European nations and the new economic power houses of China and India.

Mr Brown said: "What is keeping me awake at night is my worry that people… are not getting a mortgage; some people are losing their jobs because of this.

"Small businesses are finding it difficult to keep their cash flow …and I am determined that we act as quickly as possible to deal with these problems."

Meanwhile, the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, who is the president of the EU, said all European nations agreed on the need for a fundamental reform of the global financial system.

BUSINESS: Banks now 'bulletproof' and must start lending – Sants


No answer was the loud reply

THE six key questions posed yesterday by The Scotsman went to the heart of the Prime Minister's £37 billion banking bail-out.

Last night, the Bank of England and the Treasury were yet to respond to The Scotsman's challenge.

However, Whitehall sources said the government placed protecting the public interests above the need for the Lloyds TSB/HBOS takeover to be approved by the banks' shareholders.

The questions were:

1. Why were the recapitalisation proposals for Lloyds TSB and HBOS not considered and presented separately?

2. Why was there a presumption in favour of a Lloyds TSB takeover – particularly when shareholders of both banks have not yet had an opportunity to vote on it?

3. Why should the government be supporting a solution that stands to trigger many more job losses than those already necessary?

4. Why have assurances not been sought on the retention of key functions in Scotland?

5. What protection will there be for bank customers and consumers as a result of loss of competition across the UK, and particularly in Scotland?

6. Has the government considered alternative options for HBOS? Why could the group not be supported like RBS and given the opportunity to trade out of its current difficulties over the next three years?


Treasury offers banks a boost over dividends

THE three banks due to be part-nationalised will be able to pay dividends to their shareholders years earlier than it was originally believed.

Treasury sources yesterday, made clear that dividends could be paid after a year, depending on the banks' financial health.

This stabilised the share prices of Royal Bank of Scotland, HBOS and Lloyds TSB yesterday after the City raised concerns that the banks would become unattractive to investors if pay-outs were banned for up to five years.

It would also mean that the government would hold stakes of up to 60 per cent in RBS and 44 per cent in the merged Lloyds TSB/HBOS if private investors snubbed the shares offer.

When Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, announced the £37 billion bail-out of the banks on Monday, he said they would not be allowed to pay dividends until they had repaid the £9 billion of preference shares being bought by the government.

Yesterday, Mr Brown indicated the government was in discussions with the banks over dividends.

He said: "We want obviously to ensure that the banks are recapitalised, and one way of recapitalising banks is not just us providing money but the dividends that would normally be paid out going to recapitalise the banks."

Lloyds TSB shares finished the day 1p down at 150p, HBOS shares were up 0.4p at 85.7p and RBS shares remained unchanged at 65p.


Chancellor refuses to rejig terms of bail-out for banks


ALISTAIR Darling last night denied he was caving in to pressure over conditions attached to the £37 billion bail-out of three UK banks.

The Chancellor insisted he was not prepared to reopen the deal agreed with RBS and merger partners HBOS and Lloyds TSB, which will allow them to receive billions in emergency capital.

The banks' executives are understood to be pressing ministers to rethink a requirement for the government's hefty stakes in their companies to be repaid before any dividends are given to shareholders.

The bar on dividends has been blamed for a slide in share prices since the deal was announced on Monday, amid speculation it may scupper the merger plans of Lloyds TSB and HBOS

Reports that the scheme may be adjusted to make it more attractive to shareholders saw sharp rises in the banks' stock yesterday.

However, Mr Darling last night denied the bail-out conditions were being "rejigged".

"No, they are not," he said. "We reached an agreement with these banks on Sunday … I am not prepared to reopen an agreement reached just a few days ago."

Under the deal's terms, the three banks are prevented from paying out dividends to ordinary shareholders until they have fully repaid £9 billion of preference shares being issued to the government.

The government could end up owning about 60 per cent of RBS, and 43.5 per cent of the merged Lloyds TSB-HBOS bank.

ROSS LYDALL

Page 1 of 1

 
1

Marky Bhoy,

Dunfermline 16/10/2008 00:12:05
Am I surprised by this ........... NO

Does the Subpriminister want it to happen ....... HELL NO
2

Fast Phil,

16/10/2008 00:16:19
Question.
When the dust settles and the HBOS & RBS are in Government hands will they (the banks) still be able to print Scottish Bank Notes?
3

Am Balach,

Isle of Skye 16/10/2008 00:19:59
I predict that the SNP, Lib Dems and Tories will all get behind a campaign to save HBOS and tens of thousands of jobs throughout the UK. How can Brown claim to be saving jobs yet promote this forced marriage now?

Also there is a chance that big institutions will buy RBS shares and the bank won't be nationalised.

If Brown forces through the merger and refuses to loosen the conditions on RBS dividends then it will be final proof that he is using the financial crisis to try and screw over Edinburgh and Scotland.
4

Phil o Brian,

16/10/2008 00:22:03
Merger should be stopped until a long hard look is taken at the new position for banks. Its not good for Scotland and its not good for competition.
5

Edward,

16/10/2008 01:11:56
How surprising!
Just confirms what has been suspectedall along that the so called government part nationalisation was a put up political move to make Brown look good, now
Brown just looks cr*p!
6

SkeptikScot,

16/10/2008 01:39:40
"Bank of Scotland has the local management expertise to meet local needs. The main strength of HBOS has been its Corporate operation. Based on sound lending principles."

Surely you're not serious?! HBOS management and business model was a joke. If HBOS does survive I hope there's a complete culture change, many heads rolling - and a fresh start. It would be madness to repeat old mistakes, learn nothing and expect a different result.

I suspect if the merger doen't go through they'd be a complete nationalisation, but I might be wrong.
7

Dr. James Wilkie,

Vienna 16/10/2008 01:54:18
Will the government-held shares be vested in the Scottish Government, and if not why not?

For the purposes of efficient management it doesn't matter whose names are on the share certificates. It is the quality of management that counts, and I suspect that quality management is as likely to be found in Scotland as anywhere else. And these banks are, of course, Scottish institutions.

8

Forward not Back,

16/10/2008 02:38:29
So the argument here is that Halifax should be divested into the ex-building society nationalised banks along with Northern Crock and Bungle & Bingle but Bank of Scotland is "sound".

Bank of Scotland, if demerged, would be like Clydesdale. It would still require a parent bank unless it was fully under Government control. Therefore, there will still be less jobs in Edinburgh, the Scotsman's real concern.

Wait till it spreads into the life insurance sector; Aegon has already been hammered by the stockmarkets and Widows still sticks out like a sore thumb in the Lloyds TSB world. The same will happen to Standard Life.

Edinburgh will be the noughties recession "Ghost Town", like Coventry was in the 1980s. The two ugly gingers can sign "Gogarburn no more, West End no more" instead of "Bathgate no more" from now on.
9

doublescotch,

US.A.Thought you might like to read this: 16/10/2008 03:52:24
Australia's largest bank, Commonwealth Bank of Australia Ltd., said Wednesday it had agreed to buy Bank of Western Australia Limited and St. Andrew's Australia from troubled British bank HBOS for $1.4 billion.

Commonwealth, the nation's biggest mortgage lender, said the purchase will help expand its presence in Western Australia, the country's fastest-growing state.

"The Commonwealth Bank regularly reviews acquisition opportunities but rarely have we seen a quality asset such as BankWest become available on such attractive terms to us," Commonwealth Bank chief executive Ralph Norris said in a statement. "The strength of our current capital and funding position combined with the strategic value of this transaction makes this an attractive opportunity for the group and its shareholders."

Norris said bank branches would not close as a result of the acquisition.

The purchase is expected to be completed by December, pending the approval of the Australian treasurer and the country's competition watchdog.

Edinburgh-based HBOS PLC has been hit hard by the global credit crisis and is in the process of being taken over in the U.K. by rival bank Lloyds TSB Group.

10

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 16/10/2008 04:38:32
Another Question that should be asked is, Why is their a need to issue preference shares at all?

Preference Shares are not counted as Tier 1 Capital, in fact they are actually more of a liability than anything.

With a 12% coupon rate they will bleed 600 Million a Year from RBS, 420 Million a Year from HBOS and 120 Million a Year from Lloyds.

This is money that could be used to Lend to customers. You have Question the Logic of accepting Capital that costs you 12% a year when your Lending it out at 6%.

It has become increasingly obvious that this "rescue" was done on the back of a fag packet.

11

,

16/10/2008 04:46:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
12

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 16/10/2008 05:12:01
No Kampung,

IT HAS BEEN INCREASINGLY OBVIOUS THAT THIS "RESCUE" WAS DONE TO UNDERMINE THE SCOTTISH ECONOMY.

There is little doubt that this is the case as far as the most devious Prime Ministers is concerned, and why he should be removed from office ASAP. He is working to destroy the Scottish Economy as purely a political move, that will neuter the positive attitude that has been running through Scotland for 18 months.

Even though the average Unionist will try their best to deny this is the case, all of us know that is SLEAZY GORDONS GOAL. THIS MAN IS THE BIGGEST DANGER TO THE DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES ON THE PLANET RIGHT NOW.

If when there is a referendum on Scottish Independence, the people of Scotland Vote to stay in the Union, we Pro Independence movement will live with that decision by the Scottish Nation. That is what seperates us from Political Parties like New Labour. Unlike the Libdems and Tories who will fight the seperation purely on the case they actually believe in. Thats because they are like the SNP, and actually believe above all else that it is the Scottish Nation that should decide Scotlands future, based on the case proposed by each political party.

Gordon Brown and New Labour have an absolute disdain for the electorate. They actually believe that they are somehow annointed and the only ones who are qualified. They have treated the Scottish People as merely sheep, that will do as they are theirs by some god given right. After fifty years they have it down pat. Thats why they always come across as angry people who loath all others.

Watch the filth that comes out of some of their mouths, and you will realise that it is party insiders who's only ambition is to disrupt civilised conversation. The Scottish Nation should take to the streets of Glasgow, Edinburgh, Livingstone, Aberdeen, Dundee, Bathgate, Arbroath, Glenrothes, Peebles, Hawick, Lerwick and every other Scottish Community no matter what your political beliefs are. This is our k
13

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 16/10/2008 05:15:15
political beliefs are. This is our kids future we are talking about, and I wont just accept Gordon Browns manipulation of our future, for his own career.

ITS TIME TO STAND UP FOR SCOTLANDS FUTURE, WE CAN ARGUE INDEPENDENCE ONCE WE HAVE SECURED OUR BANKS BACK. ITS ALL OUR FUTURE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
14

Ugly George,

16/10/2008 05:25:27
15 A Better Way
"IT HAS BEEN INCREASINGLY OBVIOUS THAT THIS "RESCUE" WAS DONE TO UNDERMINE THE SCOTTISH ECONOMY."

Here we go again. Yet another claim of some anti-Scottish conspiracy. So Gordon Brown managed to create a worldwide crisis in banking and then put £billions into Scottish banks all just to scupper Scotland. Oh dear. What will his next conspiracy be - having Alex Salmond kidnapped by aliens? Is he going to get MI5 to bump off Nicola Sturgeon by getting a white Fiat to nudge her car?

Now we know why Mohammad Al Fayed is sympathtic to nationalists. He obviously feels he will be at home with other deranged conspiracy theorists he can find among their ranks.

15

Ugly George,

16/10/2008 05:37:14
15 A Better Way
"The Scottish Nation should take to the streets of Glasgow, Edinburgh, Livingstone, Aberdeen, Dundee, Bathgate, Arbroath, Glenrothes, Peebles, Hawick, Lerwick and every other Scottish Community"

Should they? And should they demonstrate with placards saying "We don't want your £37bn. Let our banks go bust"?
16

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 16/10/2008 06:17:14
No Ugly,

Never mentioned the 37 billion that is being put into THREE BANKS. I simply dont believe that the HBOS and the RBS should be Nationalised by Right Wing Brown. I want the Headquarters of the HBOS and the RBS to stay in Scotland, because they are our banks, started by Scots,run by Scots who employ residents of Scotland.

Of course I want them in the position that they were before Gordon Brown encouraged spend spend spend and took the regulations that served the Banking Industry for Generations of Stability away.

Now you are obviously one of those Brown followers who are "One Eyed" when it comes to your Slavour Party, so please let us all know why that would be a problem.

The status quo with regulation would be more preferable to a political appointee from London getting rid of a very large number of Scottish Residents who put in years of hard work, from being thrown into unemployment by Gordon Browns political conspiracy to strip Scotland of its successful financial sector.

NOW EXPLAIN TO US ALL, WHY YOU WOULDNT AGREE WITH THAT?.

IT COULDNT POSSIBLY BE BECAUSE HE FEARS SCOTTISH DEMOCRACY THAT MIGHT LEAD TO THE END OF THE UNION COULD IT?.

I want these questions answered in a civilised tone please.
17

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 16/10/2008 06:32:28
After reading comments on London Newspapers, that confirmed that Gordon Brown knew about the TRUE state of the economy and the banking sector, I am convinced that the Meeting between Brown and the Chairman of Lloyds on the Flight back from Asia is correct. They both agreed that the Government would relax the Competition Laws that Westminster Passed as Law, to allow a clear field for the HBOS takeover.

Could that be the reason that Darling had his crazy turn and came out against Brown?.

Could that be the reason that political animal David Cairns suddenly resigned his post, to be replaced by Murphy the Brown Lapdog who is doing anything he can to undermine the Elected Scottish Government, instead of his job reprenting the interests of Scotland and attracting new investments. Sorry he must be a bit confused, Murphy is actually working with Brown to put Scots out of Jobs. Like the folk in Glenrothes, who will end up broke when they lose their jobs because of Browns Recession through bad management of the UK economy.
18

Guga II,

Rockall 16/10/2008 06:33:24
Maggie Broon is determined to undermine Scotland and continue to sell the Scottish people down the river - all to help sustain his precious union and his own personal power.

The fact that there are liable to at least 24,000 jobs lost by his selling out BoS to an English bank doesn't concern him, as his aim is to undermine the Scottish economy, any way he can.

Maggie Broon is a liar and a charlatan, and a disgrace to Scotland as well as to his adopted country of England.


19

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 16/10/2008 06:36:49
Eh UGLY WHERE ARE YOU?. Wheres MY Answers?.

Helloooooo Areeee Youuuuu Thereeee Ugleee?.
20

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 16/10/2008 06:43:05
Come on Glenrothes, give Scotland a Stronger Voice.

Forget the lies of New Labour and Vote for the Voice of Scotland. Give Alex Salmond the Trust he deserves, and he will do his best for his Nations People.He has done more for Scotland than fifty years of London Controlled New Labour.
21

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 16/10/2008 06:54:13
22 A Better Way

Why do you think that putting thigs in capital letters gives it any more credibility?

"Gordon Browns political conspiracy to strip Scotland of its successful financial sector."

There you go again - its all a conspiracy. If Gordon Brown was so intent on stripping Scotland of its finacial sector, why did he put £billions in to save it. Why did he not let it go bust and save billions of taxpayers money?

22

A Better Way,

Scottish Republi 16/10/2008 07:01:45
The Employees of the RBS and the HBOS Banks should NOT accept Redunacy Demands By The Boards now controlled by London Civil Servants.

If you stick together and take your case to the Scottish Nation they will support you in numbers. Dont take this lying down. You didnt do anything wrong except do your job the bst you can.

I witnessed this craap in the Seventies, when Maggie shut down the Shipyards that she had just nationalised. Jimmy Reid and the Workers had a a Work in because the yard had orders for 8 ships and had a great future.

Ravenscraig was very profitable but Maggie did the same then. She said that the Germans could make Steel for the UK.

Gordon Brown is no better than Maggie Thatcher. At least she was up front, unlike New Labours Gordon Brown, who is sleekit.

Fight for your jobs, fight for your families and fight for your Nation. We will march with you.
23

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 16/10/2008 07:04:06
21 Guga
"Maggie Broon is determined to undermine Scotland and continue to sell the Scottish people down the river"

So much so that he is spending £30bn of taxpayers money to bail out its two banks. Have you ever stopped to consider how ludicrous your assertions appear.
24

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 16/10/2008 07:07:06
25 A Better Way
"Fight for your jobs, fight for your families and fight for your Nation. We will march with you"

Yes and I can hear the chant on the march:

What do we want? Not £30bn

When do we want it? Never
25

Evan Owen,

Snowdonia 16/10/2008 07:10:38
How much does it cost to print your own bank notes? Notes that are not accepted dooon soooth.
26

Bibamus,

16/10/2008 07:12:41
Why do people insist on spelling Livingston with an 'e' it is a Town not a person !
27

Richardinho,

16/10/2008 07:17:15
Delegates at the labour conference were punching the air with delight at the news of the collapse of the Bank of Scotland and the takeover by Lloyds. Is Brown really going to deny them their victory?
28

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 16/10/2008 07:24:14
25 A Better Way
"Ravenscraig was very profitable but Maggie did the same then. She said that the Germans could make Steel for the UK".

Please get your facts right. Ravenscraig was part of British Steel which was at the time a private company with Ian McGregor as chairman. It was he who closed it not Maggie Thatcher.

Also you appear to be unaware of the glaring contradictions in your argument. The only way Ravenscraig could have been saved would have been to nationalise it.

So you are complaining that the Ravenscraig was not nationalised to save it and now you are complaining that the Scottish banks have been nationalised to save them. Where is the logic in that argument?
29

Grumpy,

16/10/2008 07:47:21
Please would Bruce Pattullo, Hugh Young and Robin Browning come out of retirement and come and run HBOS - then there would be a real fighting chance that the Bank could be run as a Bank and put back on its feet again.
30

Rodster,

Glasgow 16/10/2008 07:53:04
"I will do whatever it takes to save the Union"
"I have ended the cycle of boom and bust"
So said by Gordon Quisling Toom Tabbard Brown.

add it to your £5000 SNP tax Bill after 2007 Elections

Al quaeda to move to Scotland
John Home Rule for Ireland but not Scotland Reid c/o Sellick Park

"you have never had it so good "
Des lost two jobs Browne

"I did no intentional wrong doing"
Wendy I need to pee right now Alexander

"Holyrood is just a glorified parish council"
Tony the war monger Bliar!!!

these are the cretins the Unionists on here want us to stay with .....
31

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 16/10/2008 08:00:38
34 Rodster
"Holyrood is just a glorified parish council"
Tony the war monger Bliar!!!"

If you put things in quotaion marks and attribute them to smebody then there is an obligation to make sure that you are accurate. That is not what Tony Blair said.
32

Ananurhing,

16/10/2008 08:02:14
Brown is clearly relishing his new found status as Flash Gordon, saviour of the Universe. Still his greatest battle is to save the union, such is it's importance to westminster. Whilst he repeats and repeats his lame mantra of " Stronger together, weaker apart", in the same breath he makes it clear that help for HBOS is wholly conditional on the merger with LTSB, without explaining why.

This says it all for me. I am convinced this is part of his declared intention " To do whatever it takes to save the union", and his willingness to damage Scotland to keep her in the fold. Whilst no one could suggest Broon engineered the HBOS debacle, he is undoubtedly capitalising on it. The fact that the normally tame Hootsman are questioning his motives, is indicative of how potentially damaging this is to Scotland.

This is a repeat of 300 years ago. Economic scorched earth policies to bring Scotland to heel. The man's a sociopath. While the SNP are in power, he will attempt to slow down the money supply to Scotland, and attack her institutions. It's not complicated, and what else can he do.

33

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 08:03:33
"There you go again - its all a conspiracy. If Gordon Brown was so intent on stripping Scotland of its finacial sector, why did he put £billions in to save it. Why did he not let it go bust and save billions of taxpayers money?"

Did you not bother to read the story?
34

Queen D,

Glasgow 16/10/2008 08:07:46
Prove it Ugly, and while doing so would you care to attribute this quotation to anyone in particular?
"This is not about regime change this is about WMDs"

It is most interesting that the arc of prosperity ,so denigrated by the new Scottish secretary, seems to be doing just fine in Ireland and Norway.
Mr Murphy seems to have incurred the wrath of an Irish economist of late with his ill advised comments, not to mention uneducated and ill informed.
Makes you wonder how many lies are being told about the state of HBoS and RBS.
35

Guga II,

Rockall 16/10/2008 08:19:18
#26.

Maggie Broon is borrowing money to buy total control over the Scottish banks. Not for the benefit of Scotland, but to enable him to tighten his grip on, and undermine the Scottish economy.

Incidentally, don't you think it would be a good idea, as well as showing some honesty, if people, such as yourself, would, when they comment on Scottish matters, let the rest of us know that they are English?
36

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 16/10/2008 08:19:24
39 Queen D
Why are you tirading on about Labour part comments to me when all I said was that if you insert comments in quotaion marks they have to be accurate. I was not defending the Labour party. Since you ask about the Tony Blair comment, I will explain:

At the time of the 1997 referendum on devolution, Tony Blair was asked about the Scottish parliament having tax raising powers. He replied thet "even a parish council" has tax raising powers. The use of the word "even" is clearly meant to draw a contrast. Alex Salmond jumped on this to claim that Tony Blair was comparing the Scottish Parliament to a parish council when it is clear that he was drawing a contrast rather than a comparison. This has now been embellished to Rodster's false attribution of a quotation.

In fact, Holyrood had not been built and the Scottish Parliament wwas not in existence when Tony Blair made the comment so his attribution is quite clearly fabricated.
37

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 16/10/2008 08:22:17
40 Guga
"Incidentally, don't you think it would be a good idea, as well as showing some honesty, if people, such as yourself, would, when they comment on Scottish matters, let the rest of us know that they are English?"

Please do not attempt to lecture me on "honesty" when you make false assertions such as this.
38

Ugly George,

16/10/2008 08:25:39
40 Guga
"Maggie Broon is borrowing money to buy total control over the Scottish banks. Not for the benefit of Scotland, but to enable him to tighten his grip on, and undermine the Scottish economy"

Wrong I'm afraid. He is not buying "total" control. Under his plan there would be a majority shareholding in one bank and a minority in another. Please get your facts right before you make assertions.
39

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 08:28:35
#42 "This crisis is world wide. How likely is it that all governments have colluded to bring it about so that the UK union can be saved?"

Oh, pay attention, you tiresome dolt. Nobody's saying that. People are saying, with considerable grounds, that Brown has capitalised on the situation in a way deliberately designed to undermine the SNP.

Heck, when even arch-Labour mouthpiece The Scotsman is saying the merger is a bad plan, something must be REALLY fishy about it.
40

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 16/10/2008 08:37:21
38 Rev
"Did you not bother to read the story?"
Yes I did. Did you. Did you read what was there or are you merely accepting the inference of the article.

Notice that the chap from the FSA said and what he didn't say. Alex Neil has deliberately misquted him.
41

Venachar,

16/10/2008 08:41:59
Went to the cinema and watched the Stone of Destiny film last night. Simple story, well told although didn't know that the Glenfinnan viaduct was on the way to London. Must have been a precursor for Ewan Macgregors Long Way Round.
Found it hilarious that there was a mirror used in the film Haig's Markinch (Glenrothes Constituancy) that had it's location stated as being in North Britain!
It may be coincidence that it was the two Scottish Institutions that have been hardest hit.
However it is telling that even when the FSA are saying that HBOS has enough dosh and that screwing real shareholders of their dividends Mssrs Brown and Darling still insist on forcing this shotgun marriage through. Even though Brown and Co have acted like they are living on Animal Farm, if enough big guns as well as ordinary shareholder give them enough stick they might just change their minds as with the 42 day detentions.
42

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 16/10/2008 08:49:01
48 venahar
"However it is telling that even when the FSA are saying that HBOS has enough dosh and that screwing real shareholders of their dividends Mssrs Brown and Darling still insist on forcing this shotgun marriage through"

Please read the article. The chap from the FSA did not say that HBOS did not say that HBOS had enoughh capital to stand on its own. I do not know if that is the case or not. The capital given by the govt to HBOS and Lloyds TSB was given on the assumption that the merger will go ahead. Is the guy from the FSA saying that HBOS has enough capital if the merger goes ahead? That is different from saying it has enough capital to stand on its own.
43

Guga II,

Rockall 16/10/2008 08:56:30
#50.

So, "old chap", you are English. Why don't you limit your comments to the Guardian or similar?
44

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 09:01:06
#50 "The chap from the FSA did not say that HBOS did not say that HBOS had enoughh capital to stand on its own. "

Yes he did. He said ALL banks. Since HBOS is currently still a separate bank, not merged with Lloyds TSB, it is included in that.
45

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 16/10/2008 09:04:22
#49 SMS

"a 70% state-owned HBOS"

Or the alternative, a 100% state owned Halifax and a 100% shareholder owned BOS.

Then you could merge Halifax with Northern Rock and Bradford & Bingley.

That would give you one state owned mess to deal with and not many.



46

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 16/10/2008 09:13:26
52 Guga
"So, "old chap", you are English. Why don't you limit your comments to the Guardian or similar?"

Why do you persist in this false assertion. Let me get your logic (or lack of it) right. Because I make points with which you disagree, I must be English. Also because I make points with which you disagree, I have no right to post on this thread.
47

Mikey,

16/10/2008 09:14:22
Why isn't the Haliban just broken up? The Halifax can go back to lending money to lost causes and the BofS can go back to doing what they know, banking!

Let's face it, the Haliban is bleeding the BofS dry! Time for an independent audit?
48

Rodster,

Glasgow 16/10/2008 09:17:01
So ugly George you accept the other quotations then as accurate .
as to Blair and his comments ,with the distortions and whoppers he told . I look forward to him taking me to court.
The point is well made they are liars and demeaning of our nation .
A plague on all their houses
49

1stEdinburgh,

Scotland 16/10/2008 09:21:22
CAN THE SCOTSMAN AND ALL SCOTTISH LOCAL AND NATIONAL NEWSPAPERS DO ALL THEY CAN TO TRY AND KEEP HBOS INDEPENDENT!
CAN WE ALL WRITE TO OUR MP/MSP TO HELP?
CAN THE SNP BRING A MOTION IN THE UK AND SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT TO THIS EFFECT FOR THE CONSERVATIVES AND LIBS (ALONG WITH ANY SANE SCOTTISH LABOUR MP/MSP) TO VOTE AND STOP THE ENFORCED MERGER FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE WHOLE OF THE UK AND NOT JUST SCOTLAND!
NEED ACTIONS NOT JUST WORDS!
50

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 09:24:26
#55 A superficial opinion piece from someone who can't even spell "Labour"? What's your point?
51

Rodster,

Glasgow 16/10/2008 09:26:49
1stEdinburgh noble sentiments and desires , however realise that Brown and Darling are doing this for political reasons.
This is more to do with "saving the union" than saving Scottish jobs or institutions.
"I will do whatever is necessary to save the union" Quisling Brown
Remember the 2 million that marched against the illegal Labour Party War???
it made no difference ,all that matters is their noses in the Westminster trough.
Scottish jobs and aspirations are nothing in comparison to their desires and aspiriations
52

Ewan M,

16/10/2008 09:27:45
#25 a better way - you're wired to the moon.

I hope it's possible to save an independent HBOS, but people like a better way are way over the top. Even the external opportunist the pie man Salmond was accepting the takeover as recently as last week.

Do any Nationalist want to criticise him?...didn't think so.
53

GrahamH,

Edinburgh 16/10/2008 09:32:14
Salmond said merger was good for Scotland, although his finance spokesman did not.

Salmond also said he would stop the trams, so...
54

McMillar,

Fife 16/10/2008 09:37:00
Left with Lloyds Halifax and RB of UK. Now is a good time to stop printing Scottish bank notes as they are just more trouble than worth. There is no place for this legacy baggage and holding onto tradition. Done really well so far hasn’t it! This is just a distraction and the real issues are around our economy and future growth prospects.
55

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 16/10/2008 09:42:20
How odd to have the Scotsman arguing FOR Scotland for a change. Suddenly they think the SNP are gods and Brown is a quisling !

Long may this conversion last !
56

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 10:00:11
#66 "This is all absurd brigadoonery."

Better that than your endless fearful hang-onto-Mummy's-apron-strings negativity. Got any POSITIVE, constructive suggestions as to the future of the bank? No, didn't think so.
57

Ewan M,

16/10/2008 10:01:56
#65 connaughtboy the Scotsman is not anti Scottish because it presents stories that make Salmond and the SNP look ridicoulous, they are a joke.

Get over yourself and your party.
58

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 10:05:30
#69 "Complete the merger with LTSB with all possible dispatch."

That's neither positive nor constructive - it will result, for a start, in as many as FORTY THOUSAND job losses, for the sake of a merger that seems increasingly unnecessary with each passing day, and is so damaging to competition that the law has had to be specially suspended to allow it.

I hope they don't let you organise the works Christmas party if that's your idea of positive.
59

Ewan M,

16/10/2008 10:06:38
#40 Guga II thank God not everyone is dillusional as you otherwise we would be in deep trouble.
60

Rodster,

Glasgow 16/10/2008 10:08:08
How the unionists like EwanM SM et al enjoy anything that brings down Scottish self confidence .
Bet there favourite bit of landlocked water in Scotland is the Lake of Monteith.
61

Fairfax,

16/10/2008 10:09:58
KampungHighlander (13): "With a 12% coupon rate they will bleed 600 Million a Year from RBS, 420 Million a Year from HBOS and 120 Million a Year from Lloyds."

That's correct. This capital injection is itself likely to cause further bank failures in future.

"This is money that could be used to Lend to customers. You have Question the Logic of accepting Capital that costs you 12% a year when your Lending it out at 6%."

It's certainly an extremely punitive rate. Presumably the banks' view is that beggars can't be choosers: they need the cash now. I see the US coupon is 5%, so their banks are in a much better position. At 12%, it's usury (ironically).
62

Westfield Bairns,

falkirk 16/10/2008 10:16:56
Gordon Brown Anti-Scottish
The merger will go ahead for the simple reason as above. Gordon Brown loathed in Scotland, hope he visits Glenrothes for some local views on his Anti-Scottish policies
63

Ewan M,

16/10/2008 10:23:27
#72 Rodster way of the mark, isn’t a prouder Scotsman than me. I am embarrassed by people who come on here with their bile and suggest they somehow represent my country, these are mostly Nationalists.

The SNP instead of getting on with the business of government the SNP seek to create division, separatism and suspicion, hardly positive is it?
64

Calum10,

16/10/2008 10:24:08
Gordon Brown's bail out plans are unravelling after only two days, but his Anti-Scottish agenda grows apace.

Forcing through this merger in the face of grim recession does not make any sense. The task now is to save Scottish jobs, not throw them away to suit the Unionist agenda.
65

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 10:25:04
#75 "The SNP instead of getting on with the business of government the SNP seek to create division, separatism and suspicion"

Empty Unionist propaganda based on nothing. In what way have they not got on with the business of government?
66

Voice of reason,

EDINBURGH 16/10/2008 10:25:55
if the Bank of Scotland is to survive on it's own , they must only employ over 40s .
67

Ewan M,

16/10/2008 10:26:35
#74 he may be loathed by you, but don't talk as if you talk for Scotland. As for him being anti Scottish, your completely ridiculous. In the words of the Pie man your comment is "unpardonable folly".
68

Alan B,

16/10/2008 10:27:15
Brown is a joke and should resign.

We are now in the ridiculous situation of other parties not wanting to critise the government due to negative effect it could have on any bail out. Admirable as that is, it ends up protecting the architect of much of this disaster.

69

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 16/10/2008 10:29:32
#66 SMS

If you had any knowledge of business, rather than being a grandstanding Unionist muppet, you would realize that 40% of all mergers are reckoned to be financial failures for the firms involved.

De merging Halifax by comparison would be a dawdle.

The UK Government could offer to purchase all the Mortgages Business along with the assets and liabilities that go along with that business as well as all the Halifax Branches outside Scotland for whatever that business is worth. My guess is it won't have any value at all so they could just pay a notional Pound to buy it. You could then stick as much money as it like into this money pit in return for shares.

That would leave BOS as a viable Commercial Bank.

With Halifax left to live or die based on the vagaries of the Mortgage Market and Gordon Browns largess.
70

Ewan M,

16/10/2008 10:29:35
#77 student loans, nursery care, 1000 NEW police OH retian, recruit and redeploy(THEY MADE THAT CLEAR IN THE MANIFESTO!) Reverend I point to your empty Nationalist propaganda.
71

Alan B,

16/10/2008 10:29:53
#Ewan M

I can understand you supporting the union. Different pople have different opinions.

However defending Brown is a joke. The guy is a clown who has been a disaster for the economy and brought the uk to it knees.

No matter what party or what view, the country needs to back any plan to bail us out and hope for the best. And then empty that useless excuse out the door.
72

,

16/10/2008 10:31:02
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
73

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 10:33:48
#82 "student loans, nursery care, 1000 NEW police OH retian, recruit and redeploy(THEY MADE THAT CLEAR IN THE MANIFESTO!) Reverend I point to your empty Nationalist propaganda."

That's not failing to get on with the business of government. That's (debatably) not fulfilling a four-year party-political manifesto after a year and a half. What BUSINESS OF GOVERNMENT, ie running the country, have they failed to pursue?
74

Ewan M,

16/10/2008 10:35:47
#85 what a laugh....key manifesto pledges failed to be deliverd and they are still getting on with governing....woosh!!!!!
75

Ewan M,

16/10/2008 10:37:17
Alan B I'll never understand you. Like i say there is no covincing you, but try and convince Scotland with your arc of insolvancy....good luck.
76

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 16/10/2008 10:42:56
84 A Better Way
Who are you talking to and why have you launched a tirade that is totally unrelated to previous comments?
77

Alan B,

16/10/2008 10:43:48
#85

Remember independent assessment of meeting its labour manifesto commitments put it at 40% of its manifesto. Alhtough some of that was due to the commitments being so vague.

Part of the problem with seriously judging a government in scotland of meeting manifesto commitments depends on a few issues. We have a PR system which means that you need to compromise to get anything through. On order to get one thing through and get the backing of another party then you have to promise to meet something that is important to that other party. As that will take money someelse has to give. It is the nature of a PR system.

Also if the government gets voted down like with the Trams that takes away resources that would be otherwise spent on meeting commitments.

And then their is the question of the budget. Brown did not announce the spending for this new government until after it was elected. As such any commitments are made on the basis of what you think you will get. I do not think anyone really thought scotland would only get 0.5% in the first yr with an average of 1.4% over 3yr being the lowerest increase for the scottish parliament on record. Also effected by the fact that inflation is now 5%. To a large extent the initial 0.5% was actually a cut in real term expenditure.

Finally Brown has withheld money that would other wise have come to scotland eg the money given to english prisons should have come to scotland as barnett consequentials. So we have the ridiculous labour tactic of saying the snp are not meeting their manifesto commitments while they are withholding money in order to prevent them for doing so.
78

Guga II,

Rockall 16/10/2008 10:47:42
#71 EwanM

It may have escaped your attention, but we are in deep trouble. So I think it might be yourself that is highly delusional.
79

Alan B,

16/10/2008 10:49:04
#87 Ewan M

Did you even read what i said. Because you sure did not seem to understand it.

I was talking about the mess of the UK and did not make any point regarding independence. My point was clear and simple.

Brown has been a disaster for the UK we should kick him out. That has nothing to do with independence. That is to do with us having a disasterous chancellor who lead the country into this complete mess, and is now PM.

No matter your views on the snp that surely cannot disguise Brown has been completely incompetent. You seem to confuse Browns incompetence with the constitution.

You do not have to be a supporter independence to know Brown has been a disaster. Many unionist posters know that to.
80

Phil the Flooter,

16/10/2008 10:51:28
84, that was pretty offensive.
81

Alan B,

16/10/2008 10:51:54
Adding to my post at #89. Remember labour announced the budget for the sp was 1.8%. It was soon found out that it was only 1.4% when the details of the announcement were fully available as they had moved the baseline to distort the figures. As such even if the headline figure had been known to the other parties in doing it budget they would have been completely mislead.
82

Rob,

16/10/2008 10:52:35
Even by Scotsman standards this discussion is totally absurd! Star prize goes to Guga for encapsulating the intellectual bankruptcy of nationalism and its associated bogotry. The conspiracy theory people are truly sensational - how thick must you be to think like that?

Personally, I would prefer Lloyds to walk. Why they want to tie themselves into this Government Scheme when they don't actually need to is quite beyond me and I think they may get a bit of a shock when they put it to their shareholders.

HBOS is too large to fail, but like Northern Rock it needs to be shredded, to use a topical expression. I don't see HSBC, the "world's local bank" wanting to touch it with a barge pole - or anyone else for that matter. Wee Aik and a band of delusional political pygmies seem to be the only ones putting their hands up - threatening to waste our money on the most celebrated financial lost cause of the century so far - if we were mug enough to ever give them the chance. I don't think too many of our countrymen will fall for that one.

The global banking community hasn't failed to notice that the two formerly great Scottish Banks are the worst cases. Of course Mr Salmond would have had an Australian modeled regulatory regime in place in the mythical Independent Scotland (he now tells us) but in that scenario both those banks would have been long gone from Scotland before the great leader could spell global competitiveness. I don't think Messrs Hornby and Goodwin are great linquists, but they would know how to say "We're out of here" in several languages including Gaelic!

83

Alan B,

16/10/2008 10:57:37
#Ewan M

"Like i say there is no covincing you"

You have never tried as you have never put an argument for the union and any coherent case for scotland place within it.

Talking about an arc of insolvency when we can see how well Norway is doing is silly. The fact is all countries are suffering from this mess made largely in the US but also as the Germans said in the UK. It does not matter if you are big or small countries too exposed to debt and the credit markets are suffering.

Both Ireland and the UK had irresponsible lending that caused huge personal debt becuase of poor management by both governments. Australia by comparison has been the model of virtue. As such Ireland and the Uk will both suffer severe problems.

As such i hardly see labours gross mismanagment of the economy in the UK being an argument for the union.
84

sonofhamish,

edinburgh 16/10/2008 10:58:27
This idea that somehow HBOS is a 'Scottish' company is more nat dreaming nonsense, its a global multi-national like most other businesses of its size. It just happens to have its headquarters here and really thats meaningless.
85

Ewan M,

16/10/2008 11:01:48
#97 Crux of the matter Scotland on its own would not have managed to bail out RBS and HBOS without being on the verge of bankrupty, end of.

Guga II I don't even think the SNP would want to be associated with you, which is saying something because they would do anything for a vote!
86

Alan B,

16/10/2008 11:02:35
#Rob

"The global banking community hasn't failed to notice that the two formerly great Scottish Banks are the worst cases."

Halifax took over BOS with halifax management installed, and the headquarters in Halifax. (the business headoffice from BOS remained in edinburgh). The problem for the combined group came from the Halifax side as it was the mortgage exposure and its financing by the credit markets that cause the problem.

87

Ewan M,

16/10/2008 11:03:57
#98, #99 very good points. You talk way to much sense for some of the SNP suporters on here.
88

Alan B,

16/10/2008 11:06:28
#100 Ewan M

Even if that were so. What has that got to do with the point I was making about Browns being a disaster zone when it came to economic management. As it was Brown that lead us into this mess. And that is the most immediate "Crux of the matter".

You come across as a labour supporting stooge. As you continually try to divert from the fact that this mess in the uk has been made far worse becuase of the sheer incompetence of Brown.

Serious union supporters like Ugly George and the like support the union but do not blindly try to say Brown has not been a complete liability.

89

Rob,

16/10/2008 11:08:09
101; I don't disagree - but so what? It's not our fault? We are where we are.
90

Alan B,

16/10/2008 11:09:31
#Ronaldo Stuffed Everyone

The run on the bank was caused by Browns dithering over guaranteeing deposits. Cameron offered to push through the 50G limit before the summer. Brown refused.

People would take money out the bank becuase the fear that the bank would go under and the government were not being clear about what despositors would get back.
91

Alan B,

16/10/2008 11:12:14
#104 Rob

I was just pointing that out as your post seemed to blame scotland specifically, with your remark that globally people will see "two formerly great Scottish Banks are the worst cases" when one is a uk wide bank headquartered in England.

As such i was just clarifying that point which i felt was abit misleading in your post.
92

Ursus arctos horribilis,

16/10/2008 11:19:52
As for the Machiavellian “no more boom and bust” Brown- with each passing day his sinister hand in this forced marriage and indeed the whole crisis prompts more questions that must be answered.

Moreover his actions (and more importantly their timing) reveal the kind of man he is: a power crazed despot with absolutely no honour –the justified sinner who is willing to ally even with the likes of the odious Mandelson and who will sacrifice anyone and anything in a futile attempt to retain his tenuous hold on Number 10.

As for the so-called Scottish banks –well although they have Scotland in their names and have a huge presence in Edinburgh - in reality their ownership, governance and customer base have been UK-wide for some time. Nevertheless they still play an enormous role in the Scottish sense of identity and in our economy therefore every effort must be made to save them-a demerger if possible would be preferable.

That Brown has been so instrumental in their demise is looking more and more like part of some deliberate plan –the man should not be trusted. Indeed is it too much of an exaggeration to suggest that Brown and the City have done to Scotland what Putin and Russia recently did to one of their former colonies-Georgia-ie put those uppity Jocks back in their place-only they did not need to use tanks and bombs. That this should be done by a Scots-born PM is particularly galling.

I can only hope that the electorate in Glenrothes are wise to this betrayal and the machinations at play and deliver a resounding verdict in the forthcoming election.
93

Alan B,

16/10/2008 11:20:22
#Rob

"It's not our fault? We are where we are."

That is not what i am saying or inferring.

My view if you have seen my posts are the problems are largely down to the government and its poor regulation of the banking sector.

I do not view this crisis as one that is related to the constitution. ie independence or union that is another argument. This crisis is about management of the economy by the government and in this case labour and Browns sheer incompetence. An independent scotland could very well had scotland lead by Brown making the same mistakes.

The real problem for the uk is that Browns did not control lending and that led to massive personal debt. The house thing has been a vicious cycle. The government do not control huge house price inflation. The amount of mortages increases vastly outwith the ability of the banks to finance through desposits so they finance it via the credit markets.

Now with the credit markets globally drying up becuase of US issues the mess in the uk is their for all to see. If the government has controlled house price inflation then you would not have had the huge levels of personal debt and banks would not have been so unstable.

Conversely if the government had regulated banks properly so they were not so relient on the credit markets you would have controlled the lend capacity of the banks and restricted the personal debt.

To add to this Brown has mae a mess with public finances running up huge deficits in the good times. And now that we need that money to bail us out and stimulate the economy the cupboard is bare.

What Brown has done borders on the criminally negligent.

94

Nell,

Over the Hills and Far, Far Away 16/10/2008 11:25:26
So Maggie Broon gives £50 Billion of our money to the banks, so that they can lend it back to us, charge us interest, and he is being hailed as brilliant.
95

Rob,

16/10/2008 11:34:30
Alan B 107. Maybe it was. The point is that Salmond and the ridiculous Swinney are claiming this wouldn't have happened if they had had the powers to regulate the "Scottish" banks. You and I know they aren't Scottish and as you and I know so well, everything will be wonderful when we put up the Tartan Curtain and "manage our destiny"

109. I agree it isn't a constitutional issue - but the SNP make everything a constitutional issue as it's the only thing they've got! And I totally agree with you on the self-proclaimed latter day Franklin Roosevelt - this man will be remembered like Dubya - "the worst ever" Criminally negligent - yes.
96

Ursus arctos horribilis,

16/10/2008 11:34:43
#37"To do whatever it takes to save the union", and his willingness to damage Scotland to keep her in the fold. Whilst no one could suggest Broon engineered the HBOS debacle, he is undoubtedly capitalising on it"


Indeed he must have known for some considerable time-at latest from the nationalisation of Northern Rock that there were massive structural problems in the whole banking sector.

We underestimate the man to say that he dithered in acting -rather I believe he deliberately waited until the situation reached crisis point when he knew he had the banks over a barrel and could dictate terms.

Getting rid of the Scottish bank dimension could be an effective weapon against the Nats and was a small price to pay to preserve the Union and more importantly prolong his tenure as PM-Flash Gordon saviour of the Universe!
97

MandyMac,

Glasgow 16/10/2008 11:40:08
BOS stopped being all Scottish when it merged with Halifax, I don't understand the emotive folly, patriotism, with this issue. Let's not forget HBOS wanted this takeover!
98

Edwardg,

16/10/2008 11:51:12
This is silly. If the merger is such a bad deal, shareholders will vote it out. If they believe that HBOS really can stand on its own two feet and there is no need to sale out to Lloyds (which is paying them just a fraction of what their shares were worth a year ago) they will reject it.

The Scotsman article is bizarre, quite frankly. I have never really seen anything like it. Do you think you had this kind of claptrap in the evening standard when Natwest was brought out? 'Great London institution' etc etc. Its a bank for heavens sake, its not like they are proposing to move St Andrews golf course south of the border! If the Scotsman feels the deal is bad and HBOS could surivive on its own, thats all well and good, but its the shareholders who decide and many of them will have a much more in depth knowledge of the state of the business than two emotive journalists.
99

Ursus arctos horribilis,

16/10/2008 11:57:17
#114 As you have correctly indicated the fact that "Flash" was able to come up with his master-plan within 48 hours-would suggest that Brown already had his strategy ready to hand.

At the latest he must have been aware of the systemic nature of the problems facing the entire banking sector from the time of Northern Rock -AT THE LATEST-so why did he not choose to act sooner?

We do him a severe disservice and underestimate his mental abilities by suggesting he somehow dithered-however what we can justifiably criticise are his motives and actions.
100

Matt there,

Somewhere 16/10/2008 12:08:35
So, who made up the doomed bank story? And why?

FSA should investigate this.
101

G,

dundy 16/10/2008 12:15:11
How quickly people forget. Gordon Brown encouraged the merger between HBOS and Llyods TSB when HBOS was subject of massive financial scares and was going to go under. The very talk of the merger saved HBOS. I don't remember any political party criticising that action at the time OR coming up with a better plan OR any plan.
Now if the merger is not required this is because the action taken by the British government has stabilised the situation and allowed some breathing space....let HBOS and their shareholders decide.
102

Brian Hill,

Edinburgh 16/10/2008 12:37:57
A growing realisation is taking root that Brown and Darling are continuing with the destruction of HBOS's Independence for political motives.

That realisation is fast developing into anger at the completely unnecessary loss of jobs which will occur as a direct result of this merger, were it ever to take place.

The huge groundswell of Scottish opinion, headed by the Scotsman (amazingly) is having an effect. This groundswell aided by the loss of the Glenrothes by election will bring this Labour Government to its senses and it will leave HBOS in peace or indeed, even allow HBOS to decouple, separating Banking from Mortgages.

103

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 12:39:37
#92 "So how long is your dawdle going to be? How much is it going to cost?"

How much is it going to cost the economy if the merger goes through and FORTY THOUSAND people lose their jobs?
104

Ugly George,

16/10/2008 12:43:06
127 rev
"FORTY THOUSAND people lose their jobs?"
Where did you get this figure from?
105

noswod,

Honestas 16/10/2008 12:45:07
The two Scottish olde labour guys Broon and my Darling carved up HBOS and RBS to kill any opportunity of Scottish indendence the various decisions were based upon political not economic considerations . So what if 45,000 Scots lose thier jobs and any hope of good careers, and dare I say it self deterimation. Well they are used to unemployment, closing doon the pits, shipbuilding and engineering has sensitised them for it. Labour has managed the final phase in this process over the last 11 years. Unfortunately we add to the problem by believing that we can win the world cup or pick the winner in the 3.30. I plead for more economic realism, Scotlands economy is very weak and fragile, oil will not save us and we are highly dependent on big hand outs from London if they stop we are sunk like Leith Docks
106

aljok.23,

the world 16/10/2008 12:50:22
it seems to me that the Union vote winner is based on,and in fact banking on, Scots voters being frightened into voting anything other than SNP/ Independence as they display the power of Westminster.That is their combat powerbase- to frighten individual Scots by threatening their financial, therefore social, stability. We should all see through this and make a decision when it counts without fear.
This is easily summarised in my mind by - Independence = pro-Scotland(any term), Union = under class-Scotland(long term).
107

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 13:00:43
#129 ""FORTY THOUSAND people lose their jobs?"
Where did you get this figure from?"

http://tinyurl.com/52vpxm

http://tinyurl.com/3vfdtq

http://tinyurl.com/4nywlx

http://tinyurl.com/3ogl7e

Among many others.
108

Ursus arctos horribilis,

16/10/2008 13:21:48
#122 "The current problems were precipitated by the Lehman collapse."


Nonsense -and why Lehman??-This was only one in the house of cards that has collapsed-a list that includes Bear Sterns, Fannie mae, Freddy Mac, AIG , Washington Mutual.

In the UK context Brown as previous Chancellor must have been well aware of the systemic problems facing the entire UK banking sector since Northern Rock -as he would have been aware that other banks used the same (flawed) business model.

FYI Northern Rock received assistance from the BoE over one year ago in September 2007!

The 37 billion pounds question is why he waited until the banks were up shxt-creek without a paddle before he carefully chose his moment to act.
109

Billy Boy,

Sherman Oaks California-cation 16/10/2008 13:31:24
These "recovery" issues are way above my head. It seems that not much has been said about the root cause of these financial collapses. Todays business model demands continual increases in stock values in order that the investors get better returns and the corporate chiefs get better salaries and bonuses. As a result they are building a structure that HAS to top out and fail. Greed runs these corporations. Whatever happened to ethical business practises? And what is wrong with just ploughing along making a reasonable profit as opposed to continually expanding into megacorporations?
110

The Strategist,

16/10/2008 13:39:03
Do any of you RBS/HBOS sycophants ever stop to think and ask yourselves why when the combined profits of these two has been over £10bn that Scotland has such an appallingly low new company birth rate?
111

Fairfax,

16/10/2008 13:39:17
sm753(122): "Garbage.

The current problems were precipitated by the Lehman collapse."

I agree. However, HBOS' massive exposure to the wholesale credit markets was obviously a time-bomb. Even without Lehmans, its share price had lost just under £2 every quarter since September 2007, starting at roughly £8.50 -- extrapolation is never sure, but it was hard to see much hope for HBOS:

http://markets.ft.com/tearsheets/performance.asp?s=hbos&x=0&y=0&vsc_appId=ts&ftsite=FTCOM&searchtype=equity&searchOption=equity
112

Alan B,

16/10/2008 13:48:25
#111 Ronaldo

Brown is the cause of most of this mess. The art of running an economy is to ensure that the economy is in a good position to endure any global issues. Brown has run a short termist economic strategy either through complete naivity or for short term polical gain.

It was no ones fault other than Brown that house price inflation was not control. That is the job of government to control inflation. He opted out controlling house price inflation and it is not hitting us hard the consequences.

Becuase of that massive house price inflation their is record personal debt. The whole Brown economics was a vicious spiral. Higher and higher house prices, more and more mortgage debt to pay for it, and more and more lending from the banks. while we can blame individual banks, or individuals for taking too much risk getting on the property ladder or moving to a better house, or buy to let trying to make money, the personal overlooking this financial arrangements were brown. He is the elected person who was there on our behalf to run the economy. Ensure stability.

Browns talk of stability and prudence is there for everyone to so see as a lie.

Browns also changed the way banks were regulated. Afew yrs later they collapsed. Brown has got to take responsibility for his own dreadful economic management. Unfortunately people like you seem to want to act as his appologist.

Add to that the huge levels of public sector deficits in good times. That is basis. The government should not spend more money than it is taking in during a so called boom. Because when the enevitable slow down occurs you are up s*** creak.

As for Browns handling of the crisis. 48 hrs do not make me laugh. The crisis in the uk start last yr with nothern rock. Brown has had more than a year to act and ensure the banks were capitalised properly and could survive the failure of the credit market.

Most independent financial viewers have said Browns made a mess of NR and have been criti
113

Alan B,

16/10/2008 13:53:04
.. critical of his handling of the crisis although the latest bail out has been better received. But that hardly excuses years of incompetence.

As for having a go at Cameron. I am no tory but all Cameron has done is support Brown at this time leaving any fights and ridiculing of Brown till after we are out this mess.

Trying to divert attention from Browns incompetence by having a go at people not in power and that were not responsible for the mess says more about your own blind backing of Brown.
114

Alan B,

16/10/2008 14:00:04
#138 The Strategist

Very good question. And one that we really need to address and question.

- Is it becuase there are too few business ideas
- Is it lack of funding as you indicate
- Is it too few people in scotland with ideas for businesses
- is it people are too conservative to take the risks involved in starting a business
- is it the lack of skilled people who can then use these skills to start a business. Many business are by people getting experience within an industry and then using that experience to good use for opening up a business.
- is the poor economy has scared people of from taking risk and chances. I would definately say that was the case back 20yrs ago but think the culture has changed in scotland now.
- is the lack of businesses give fewer opportunities
- is it the government do not go to small business when contracting work. This was said to be a big issue a few yrs ago. nicol stephan pledged to change it.

If it is lack of finance for business we have to ask why.
- Was it just easier and more rewarding for banks to lend to property purchasers.
- was it poor business plans
- Was it banks do not think they were a good credit risk.

It was said one of the reasons for low birth rate is was the low home ownership and one way of financing a business at the begining was to remortage your house etc.
115

Alan B,

16/10/2008 14:09:59
#Billy Boy

I think more discussion on the cause will come after we are out the mess. Although there has been discussion about in on this forum.

The underlying cause as i see it is too much mortgage lending which turns into too much bad mortage lending. As much of this was financed not through deposits and through the credit markets then when the credit markets failed ie banks woudl not lend to each other then the whole pack of cards has come tumpling down.

The US is the root cause. As it was there sub prime mortage lending that caused the credit markets to seize up. Iceland has been badly hit as it bought so much US debt. Mortage companies just sell on any mortages and then are less lighty to take serious wether the debt can and will be repaid. It makes the whole thing global.

The UK (and countries like Ireland) have followed the US will silly mortage lending and while this has not cause the global crisis as both are too small it makes our crisis much worse than if we had been properly managed. Australia has apparently regulated debt levels and loans very well meaning that its banking sector is not exposed to much.

If the uk had ensured less mortage debt and ensured that more of that debt was from deposits and not financed by the credit markets then we would be in a far better situation.

We can blame banks but they are always going to try to maximise returns within the framework allowed. The more conservative banks were slagged of for not achieving the performance of the more riskier models.

We can blame the man on the street as personal responsibility means people should only take out debt they can affored. Problem is the massive house price inflation the government has allowed and even encouraged means that peole are almost forced to buy early to get on the property ladder or upgrade as they have families. Others will also see the buy to let as a great way out of Browns pensions meltdown.
116

WL,

Livingston 16/10/2008 14:27:57
Brown just wants to make HBOS a nice present to English Lloyds TSB, ignoring what is best for the HBOS shareholders. This takeover should not take place.
117

Publius,

London 16/10/2008 14:35:33
Some of the comments on today's board are very silly. Brown is not trying to undermine Scottish self-confidence or strengthen the union by ruining Scottish banks. Indeed the bank that may be ruined by his package is LloydsTSB. RBS and HBOS ruined themselves.
That said I've been reflecting on Brown's package and I now think it is wrong.
In my opinion a different way forward should have been found for each bank.
(1) LloydsTSB. If Lloyds really does need another £5 billion of capital (which I doubt), it should have been encouraged to raise the money privately - like Barcays.
(2) RBS. The Bank of England should have lent money to RBS in its capacity as 'lender of last resort'. For security, the BoE should have taken control of RBS's peripheral operations - insurance, overseas operations, hotels, trains, overseas banks, the Gogarburn folly.
(3) HBOS. HBOS should have been given the Bradford & Bingley treatment, that is nationalisation with quick disposal of viable operations to the highest bidders. That way a viable bank of Scotland might have emerged from the ashes.

Also I think that Brown's treatment of Iceland was appalling. Expropriating the British assets of the one Icelandic bank that was solvent (and thus driving it too into bankruptcy) was a wicked way to behave to a friendly neighbour and ally. The UK government should have offered to help - as have Russia and Norway.
118

Marga,

Fife 16/10/2008 14:50:11
120 Ursus arctos horribilis,16/10/2008 11:57:17

FT article with some interesting comments on the merger and Brown's trustworthiness:

JUST TELL THEM THEY DIDN'T UNDERSTAND ...

The casual manner in which HM Treasury is briefing away the matter of dividend restrictions on British banks subscribing to HM Bailout is truly breathtaking.

http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2008/10/16/17126/just-tell-them-they-didnt-understand/?source=rss
119

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 14:59:27
#146 "Hello? They are trying to save RBS and HBOS in the best way possible rather than let them go to the wall."

FORTY THOUSAND job losses is the best possible way? Funny how you keep glossing over that troublesome fact.

Neither bank is in danger of "going to the wall". Did you not read the story you're commenting on?

"The immediate issue for companies has not been their capital. No-one has run out of capital. The problems with liquidity were do to with the drying-up of wholesale money markets."
120

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 15:14:06
#154 "It isn't a fact, it is conjecture.

How many job losses if LTSB walk off and HBOS has to be nationalised?"

Far fewer, since there would still be two banks. Are you seriously trying to defend the comically absurd position that the merger WON'T cost thousands, probably tens of thousands, of jobs? You think LTSB-HBOS will maintain two branches in the same High Streets where they currently have one each?

You must know full well that tens of thousands of sudden job losses in this sector alone - and who am I to argue with the professional analysts who say 40,000? - would be a CATASTROPHE for the economy, but you're too desperate to defend Crash Gordon and his Union to see the reality. Everyone but you knows this merger should now be dead.
121

Ewan M,

16/10/2008 15:22:22
#158 don't encourage there small minds please!

Alan B, Accelerator you have way too much time on your hands, this doesn't help your paranoia!!!
122

Ursus arctos horribilis,

16/10/2008 15:32:39
#136 please refrain from abuse and the keyboard warrior antics -it detracts from the paucity of your arguments which are not that great to begin with.

I will be gracious and not knowing you assume that you have wandered onto the board from the football boards.

To join-up the dots for you Lehman may have gone bust in September but everyone and his dog has known about these problems for well over a year -certainly the Central Banks have been monitoring exposures in the part of the world I am based -something I can personally verify.

To repeat Northern Rock received assistance from the BoE over one year ago in September 2007 and you can be certain our PM would know of the systemic problems at the heart of the banking system-why-because he was instrumental in creating them!
123

Peter20,

Edinburgh 16/10/2008 15:35:44
Good God - reading this page gives a real insight into the paranoia and anti-Englishness of some scary folk. The banks are in trouble and on the verge of bankrupcy because THEY were irresponsible with OUR money, and yet they are being lauded as heroes that must be saved whereas Brown is being cast as some sort of super-villain who constructed this whole crisis (which I may add most banks have survived through more responsible lending) to hu,iliate Scotland. You want the banks to be saved and he has saved them - the word you are looking for is "Thanks"!
124

Ewan M,

16/10/2008 15:49:27
#162 yor absolutely correct. the problem is some on this forum will poison and twist anything to support Independence and the SNP.

Some of their comments are disgraceful and verging on serious paranoia. The always potray a sense of victim hood and have a massive chip on their shoulder.
125

Ursus arctos horribilis,

16/10/2008 15:50:26
#149 Marga Thanks -I will have a look. We are all being played for fools-mere pawns in the game.

For the halfwitted numptie sm753 who thinks this somehow only became an issue after Lehman last month-doh-here is an article from last year (July 2007) crack cocaine accounting and the sub-prime mess.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=aIOWGBzzWpNo&refer=columnist_weil
126

Ewan M,

16/10/2008 15:51:28
#143 the only thing that undermines Scotland it paranoid people like you, don't you get that?
127

Alan B,

16/10/2008 15:51:39
#Publius

I agree Browns use of the anti terror laws was appalling.

Interesting take on the problems. Good to read a sensible post. Even if I do not agree with your solutions it is good that someone is actually puting together a constuctive post.
128

Ewan M,

16/10/2008 15:54:06
#167 "we are all being played for fools" I ain't and you don't talk for Scotland just yourself. If you talked for Scotland we would be in a very bad place.
129

Alan B,

16/10/2008 15:57:40
#159 Ewan M

Exactly where have my posts been paranoid. I have never posted that Brown has done this as some sort of plot

I just think he is completely incompetent.

As i have said this crisis is not about independence or the union. This crisis to me is about the sheer incompetence of Brown (mainly in his time as chancellor). And the fact we will all have to suffer because of his ineptitude.

That is not paranoia that is just someone who has opinions on how an economy should be run and am annoyed at some idiot can destroy many peoples lives with his unbelievable shortsightedness.
130

Alan B,

16/10/2008 15:59:23
#Peter20

Why would anyone want to thank an idiot like brown bad economic management of the economy. I do not think it is some unionist plot. I think he has just been a dreadful chancellor and we are all going to suffer because of that buffoon.
131

K McDonald,

Glasgow 16/10/2008 16:03:55
158
happy english,
Kent 16/10/2008 15:19:36
Lets face it you could not make it up if you tried. Scotland has lost both there Banks to England and it was a Scot that did it.>>>

Kentishman, we have enough nationalist fvckwits of our own, so GTF over to the Herald board where you will find plenty takers for your moronic bait.

By the way, Barclays and HSBC are next on the shorters' hitlist. All banks will soon be owned by the UK taxpayer.

132

Ursus arctos horribilis,

16/10/2008 16:06:55
#163 Indeed you have to wonder at these fakey types all posting the same school-boy crxp under different names -are things really that bad back home-can't they get a real job ? PS Good luck with your "Labour-free" experiment.

Thing is I am not even a card carrying Nationalist-last voted in 1979-but reading some of the childish drivel posted by some people -Hey Jimmy pass the shortbread and whisky and gaun yerself wee Eck!
133

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 16/10/2008 16:07:54
I notice that sm753 is on this thread.

Has he apologised yet for saying that HBOS could not continue on its own?

Surely sm doesn't profess to know more about this than the head of the FSA?
134

Ursus arctos horribilis,

16/10/2008 16:14:14
#170 "we are all being played for fools" I ain't and you don't talk for Scotland just yourself. If you talked for Scotland we would be in a very bad place."


Indeed-and if you talked for us then we would be rightly accused of being illiterate morons. Thankfully you do not.
135

Mcsnagpile,

16/10/2008 16:26:08
Ah still dinnae like the brummie wae the milk bottom glasses but ma money is staying in the mound.
136

john z,

edinburgh 16/10/2008 16:30:02
It is surprising, considering the amount of 'heroic' spin coming from Gordon Brown lately, that he has fallen silent.

From the very beginning, the Lloyds-HBOS merger had dirt all over it. Time for some answers Mr.Brown, or maybe the people of Scotland and the voters of Glenrothes can make their own minds up.

It is good that The Scotsman and all the political leaders (except labour) are trying to save the HBOS group.

Brown is playing with fire.

In particular, Alex Salmond and Alex Neil have fought hard for the interests of Scotland. Is it any surprise why Brown and the Scottish Labour muppets are so despised in Scotland?

Times have changed, and the people of Scotland are no longer willing to be used as pawns in the games of the English Government.

Whether you believe in independence/SNP/other or not, it is abundantly clear to everyone in Scotland the way Brown is using Scottish banking Jobs and careers for purely political means. The man is a disgrace.
137

camster,

Glasgow 16/10/2008 17:07:31
156 Why don't you wake up and smell the roses? The principal business of HBOS is selling mortgages and loans to the English. That business is dead in the water so jobs will go. The Government knows there is excess capacity and does not want to be seen to be the one doing the firing.

The financial world is about to getting heavily regulated and nationalistic over the next decade. Scotland can hope to have 1 large bank left operating over the whole of the UK or a couple of tiny ones with a Scottish only focus.




138

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 16/10/2008 17:10:23
I have a funny feeling that Broon's tenure as Flash Gordon might not last long.
139

Kipling,

16/10/2008 17:13:12
Not so much Halif ax jobs and Lloyds ax em.
140

Steve 'The Nugget' Davis,

Edinburgh 16/10/2008 17:13:37
#185 - Excellent thought process!

Take the postings of one "unionist" on the Scotsman web-site and use that isolated example to dictate your future electoral decisions down a single-issue route.

Also, use it as an irrefutable yardstick for the "breadth and depth of the unionist intellectual repertoire".

I'm not particularly swayed towards unionism or independence - but I just love the logic of some of the posters on this web-site!
141

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 16/10/2008 17:16:22
Gordon Banks would be more appropriate.
142

Steve 'The Nugget' Davis,

Edinburgh 16/10/2008 17:36:01
#194 - But, you're still using the exceedingly limited number of people who post on this web-site to significantly influence your views and how you will vote in the future.

Why would the behaviour of the English media have any influence over how you would vote in an independence referendum? Also, do you not need to be convinced that a Scottish government would be better than the current British one - instead of saying that the current British one is no good, so you'd just vote for independence on the strength of that?
143

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 17:36:25
#195 Don't get yourself worked up. Our friend's loud and repeated demands for tens of thousands of people to lose their jobs to satisfy his ideological hatred of the SNP tells you all you need to know about him. See how he wriggles and squirms and tries to avoid the human (and economic) costs of his position.
144

Steve 'The Nugget' Davis,

Edinburgh 16/10/2008 17:56:36
#200 - "Because the English media are representative of the English mainstream"

How do you draw that conclusion?

The Scotsman, the Herald, and the Daily Record (to name a few) seem to have widely differing views on many subjects, as do many of the newspapers that are based in England - are you sure that all of the mainstream media firms in England hold identical opinions on all issues relating to Scotland?
145

SkeptikScot,

16/10/2008 18:11:13
But what about HBOS's dodgy senior management? And their mobile-phone-shop spiv culture? And who seriously thinks they had a realistic business plan? A lot of heads would need to roll and a lot of fundamental changes would be needed. I imagine that without a merger there would be a full nationalisation. This might not necessariliy be a bad thing as the changes could take place without endangering HBOS - to be privatised in better times.
146

Steve 'The Nugget' Davis,

Edinburgh 16/10/2008 18:13:08
#204 - I think that any reasonable person will know that that is not true.

However, assuming that it is, are you also sure that these views are subsequently held by all of the people who live in England as well?
147

Nevsky,

Moscow 16/10/2008 18:19:09
Well it looks like Brown is now losing the massive gamble he took on the banks. Lloys are petitioning to relax the rules on dividends which meand that either a) the government will resfuse and Lloyds will tell them to shove it or b) they agree and the taxpayer will not be getting their money back ebany time soon.

Seems like the banks have cottoned on to just how bad a deal this was and will now hold the government to ransom for an ill thought out idea.

Hope for HBOS though and surely now Brown will give his full backing to supporting the independence of the bank.
148

Nevsky,

Moscow 16/10/2008 18:22:30
Umemployment now rising at a 17 year high and at exactly the same total as when Labour came to power.

So apart from nearly putting the country into bankruptcy i wonder just what their legacy will be (apart from the nationalisation of banks, job losses, a prolonged recession and the highest national debt ever recorded in the history of the UK)?

149

Nevsky,

Moscow 16/10/2008 18:29:36
sm753#

You think there will be no job losses in HBOS? You think the government can run anything as a succesful entity and holding as much as 60% of the shares?

Question: who will want shares in it ( they are already being ditched)?

Question: poor return on dividends have already consigned it to the 'basement' section of the governments 'are you being served banking system'.

Question: cutting back on investment portfolios will lead to no job losses you think?

Question: If the government could not even run the post office without flogging it off then you expect them to be at the cutting edge of a profitable and responsible banking system?

Question: You thnk the brightest and best will not leave the bank wholesale and look for jobs in other banks and other sectors?

Question: You think this bank will not wither on the vine under government control and that there will be year on year more and more job losses until the bank eventually dissapears?


All you have to say is that there will be a 'shrink in the loan book'

Get a grip and think things through for goodness sake!
150

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 18:33:37
#208 "Never said anything of the sort.

Your thousands of job losses are conjecture, not fact."

So just be clear for us - you think the merger WON'T lead to tens of thousands of job losses? Of course they haven't happened yet, because the merger hasn't happened yet. But what a pathetic coward's way of dodging the issue.

Of COURSE the merged bank will sack thousands of people. They're not going to have thousands of High Streets all over the country with two branches of the same bank on them.
151

Rev. S. Campbell,

16/10/2008 18:35:28
#207 "Kindly find one reference I have posted anywhere containing "hatred" of you or anyone else. (No, not even Salmond; I ridicule him, I don't "hate" him.)"

#183 "Salmond = fat, spivvy shyster and charlatan, elected by 17% of the electorate, who does not and will never represent me to anyone"

No, you're right, that's not hatred at all. What CAN we all have been thinking?
152

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 18:54:24
#215

con·tempt [k?n témpt]
noun

attitude of utter disgust or hatred: a powerful feeling of dislike toward somebody or something considered to be worthless, inferior, or undeserving of respect


So even you don't know what you're talking about. Why should the rest of us listen?
153

Nevsky,

Moscow 16/10/2008 18:57:10
216 sm753#

The deal will i think not now go through apart from the fact that the shareholders are binning the shares and they will be considered next to premium bonds.

If HBOS can stand alone as an independent bank then that is the course that should be taken, partly obviouselt from my standpoint because i believe the Bank is vital to Scotland.

They should make use of the money the government has offered until the markets open and then take the loss and shred all of the toxic debt they can and do what they can to absorb the job losses that will be an inevitability.

HBOS is a sound bank, this point has been stated from the very beginning of the debacle and they should not be allowed to go under or forced into any government sponsored aquisition at any cost.

This whole policy was not thought through. I do not say that the government was deliberately trying to get rid of a Scottish institution but they have dealt with the whole matter in a cavalier and a bullying manner; not good enough!
154

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 19:01:03
#217 "Yes, and of COURSE so would HBOS in state hands."

What drivel. The point of a bailout is to stabilise the bank, restore inter-bank liquidity and let it resume normal trading. You don't do that with mass redundancies. There might be a few in efficiency measures, but not the TENS OF THOUSANDS that will undoubtedly, inevitably result from the merger.
155

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta CA for more WAR VOTE McCain 16/10/2008 19:12:18
Hey all U squawking fanatical SNP Dudes ..

This is not the time to be dreaming about Independence for Scotland ..

U should be figuring out ways to save, and create JOBS for Scottish workers.

Independence will reduce Scotland to a pip-squeak nation and failure.
-------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Liz Cameron, the group's chief executive, said: "The continuing problems in the global financial sector, general slowdown in the international economy and continued price inflation are real problems for Scottish business."
-----------------------------------------------
Quote:
The leading group of eight countries, the G8, has backed Gordon Brown's call for an international summit on the financial crisis and to renew stalled global trade talks.


Chill out Dudes
GC
156

Nevsky,

Moscow 16/10/2008 19:18:15
223 Galactic#

Sorry what has this got to do and why are you an an American taking anything to do with Scottidh constitutional affairs.


Two cut and pasts do not have anything to do with the Bank of Scotland in case you had not noticed and your second says what? That people back a summit, what has this got to do with anything?

You seem to be on the wrong thread and slighty off centre a little; i suggest you relax a little, chill out and concentrate on the covers of your Zappa albums..more in tune with you than constitutional and baning matters i feel!
157

Jimmy Twoshoes,

16/10/2008 19:54:52
@ Rev and his tens of thousands of sacked people...

How and when do you envisage this happening? Do you predict 40,000 people receive P45s on 1st Jan?

My thoughts - of course there will be redundancies. I'd suggest the branches will see the most overlap, which are the areas with the highest staff turnover anyway. Straight off the bat simply not replenishing the staff will take care of (excuse the lack of sympathy in that term) at least a thousand staff over the course of 6 months. Also my thoughts, your figure is sensationalism - nothing more (and you know it).
158

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 16/10/2008 20:12:14
If I was Broon I would borrow money from abroad at x%. Then I would lend it to the banks at x+++++% if they did what I told them to do.

Then I would wait until everything was cut and dried. Then I would get all my friends to buy shares in my new business. Forget the dividends, think of the profit.
159

K McDonald,

Glasgow 16/10/2008 21:05:55
182 happy english,Kent 16/10/2008 16:38:34
#173 Try Maid of Kent

I stand corrected:-) You guys/gals put a up good fight against William the Conqueror. Respect. Someone should make a Braveheart type movie based on the story. You could kick-start an East Medway seperatist movement on the back of it.

Barclays, that great symbol of Englishness, will soon be forced to "merge" with BankaUK, btw ;-)



160

arc of insolvency,

16/10/2008 21:10:48
Rev. S. Campbell your way over the top. Hardly a good example of a nationalist supporter, you'll turn people off.
161

arc of insolvency,

16/10/2008 21:12:24
#224 Get a grip and think things through for goodness sake!
162

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 21:21:22
#225 "Also my thoughts, your figure is sensationalism - nothing more (and you know it)."

Right. So those notorious tabloid hype rags the Times, the Telegraph, the Independent and the Banking Times are all just scaremongering for laughs. I see. Well, I'll definitely take your word over theirs, since you're some random internet tool with a false name. Sorry for any misunderstanding.

Oh, and #222 - the distinction between "utter disgust" and "hatred" is a very small and academic one. The difference between either of those and "ridicule" is very large indeed. So stop trying to pretend to be what you're not. You're blinded by hatred of Salmond and the SNP, and you'd be a lot less worthy of contempt if you'd just admit it like a man.

Tens of thousands is simple common logic. Whether it's 20,000 or 30,000 or 40,000 is a detail, it's an economic catastrophe regardless.
163

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 21:28:42
#221 "Look at Northern Rock - shrinking the loan book to match deposits and a cap on market share.

And redundancies."

1,500 including natural wastage. A rather dramatically lower number than 40,000. Lloyds TSB and HBOS have about 175,000 employees between them, split almost 50/50. Forty thousand could well turn out to be a conservative estimate, since doubling-up of branches is the norm rather than the exception.

But you don't care about those families, as long as you can somehow contrive an excuse to slag off Alex Salmond out of their misery, so why even debate it? Why not just say "I hate Alex Salmond, he's a big fat smelly pants", which is more your normal level of discourse anyway?
164

dude,

16/10/2008 21:29:03
155
sm753,
16/10/2008 15:08:09
146

I have read all of those articles, and more, and agree with them.

No-one is glorying in the banks' troubles.

No-one is insulting Scotland or Scots.

Lots of people are noting the discomfiture of the SNP and its Immense Leader.

That's the difference, see?

"Scot" is not the same as "Scottish Nationalist".

"Scotland" is not the same as "SNP".


So what of the reports of labour MPs celebrating the fact this was happening, the Scottish finantial industry in ruins, and these so called Scottish MPs who are voted in to serve the people of Scotland and the elected Labour MPs for Scotland are celebrating.

I hope the SNP gets hold of some footage of that little traiterous cabal and let the full country see it on national TV
165

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 21:30:55
And incidentally, just 800 of Northern Rock's redundancies were compulsory.
166

dude,

wishaw 16/10/2008 21:35:26
"Scot" is not the same as "Scottish Nationalist".

"Scotland" is not the same as "SNP".


I dont think anyone did, but you can be assured that the SNP will stick up for Scotland's interests, also is Mike Russel not an Englishman!
167

awantapassport,

brighton 16/10/2008 21:44:50
back off with the repeated blasphemy quotes dude! you sound like mole.
168

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 22:44:02
#238 Why do I give two hoots what "Nevsky" says? Why is he an authority? And yes, Northern Rock is smaller than HBOS, well spotted. But the compulsory redundancies there were around 15% of their workforce. The likely redundancies from HBOS/LTSB are close to 25% of the workforce, and percentages aren't the issue anyway. The problem is the absolute number - 40,000 is a HUGE leap in unemployment, where 800 is a small blip.

You can wriggle any way you like, but you're still demanding 40,000 people lose their jobs for your ideology. Just stick to calling Alex Salmond fat, it's more intellectually honest and not actually factually wrong, unlike almost everything else you say.
169

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 16/10/2008 23:32:35
#240 You don't seem to have spotted that 15% is a lot less than 25%, dear.

I have never ONCE claimed anything even remotely LIKE "nationalisation would save all the jobs". I haven't even said HBOS should be nationalised. Once again, you live in a fantasy world. Stick to calling Alex Salmond fat, son.
170

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

16/10/2008 23:49:48
One wonders why the Scotsman are pressing so hard on this - does somebody somewhere have a financial interest in all this?
171

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

16/10/2008 23:54:14
I started to read this thread and got fed up after reading the tenth or so conspiracy theorist implying that Brown has somehow manufactured all of this to save the Union.

He has not.

What he is doing is using the events in this crisis for his own political ends to save the Labour Party.

The Union is incidental.
172

,

17/10/2008 00:14:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
173

,

17/10/2008 00:39:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
174

SkeptikScot,

17/10/2008 00:47:54
This is an article written up again as spin.

The reason 'they' are saying "all banks now had enough capital" is they are desperate banks go back to 2007 lending. Without it there'll be the mother of recessions and a lost general election.

Weirdly, on the other article where the regulator says 'all the UK banks are healthy enough to lend' everyone seems to realise how ridiculous this is.
We've had the same sorts of promises between every other bank collapse.

... and what about the little matter of hundreds of trillions of dollars of credit swaps? Ssshhh......


175

BorderLineScottish,

17/10/2008 02:14:00
God!!!! There are some obsessed people on this blog!!!!

Why oh why this obsession with the Union etc.,?????? Who cares, ffs???? Gordon this, Alex that! All for the dake of the Union, or not!! WHO CARES?!?!?!?!??!

Sad lot, you are!!

 

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.