Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Premium Article !

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

Options

Premium Article !

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

Subscribe

Registered Article !

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

RBS shares plummet on another day of financial woe



View Video
Download Video

Video

Financial analyst David Buik on the banking crisis
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: 07 October 2008
SHARES in the Edinburgh-based Royal Bank of Scotland were down 40% at one point this morning following yesterday's market-wide slump.
RBS was the biggest victim on another day of turmoil for banks amid mounting speculation that the Government is set to spend billions on a taxpayer-funded rescue of the ailing sector.

There were also big falls for HBOS, Barclays and Lloyds TSB following crisis talks with Chancellor Alistair Darling last night.

But in an attempt to calm market nerves, RBS said: "Contrary to press speculation, RBS did not make a request to Government for capital."

Meanwhile, Iceland nationalised its second-biggest bank Landsbanki – leaving UK savers in limbo as its Icesave online website was frozen.

The wider FTSE 100 Index was 2% higher after yesterday's 7.8% slump – the biggest since Black Monday in October 1987 – as commodities bounced back slightly from the fall and oil prices rose.

But attention was firmly focused on banks, with RBS – also downgraded by investment ratings agency Standard & Poor's – later down 22% after its denial.

The bank's stock slumped after Sir Fred Goodwin and his rival bosses at Barclays and Lloyds TSB met Chancellor Alistair Darling last night – with a possible capital injection for the sector reportedly on the agenda.

The concerns caused a fresh spike in money markets as fearful banks refused to lend to each other.

The overnight lending rate, which should be virtually the same as the official 5% base rate in normal conditions, jumped more than 0.75% to 5.84%. Three month rates – used to price mortgages – widened to 6.28%
Alongside RBS's falls, HBOS was down 14% and Lloyds TSB 7% lower.

Barclays also registered big losses but recovered slightly to 4% down after denying it had called for fresh capital.

A spokeswoman for Lloyds TSB refused to comment on whether any discussions were taking place with the Government.

"We never comment on any discussions that may or may not have taken place with the Government," she said.

The banks at the meeting called for the Chancellor to act quickly but Mr Darling did not have a fully-prepared rescue plan, the BBC said.

Bank of England Governor Mervyn King and the new chairman of the Financial Services Authority, Lord Turner, were also at the meeting, although the Treasury declined to comment.

London's leading shares started today's trading with some solid gains, but the Footsie lost its momentum amid the banking sector woes.

They deepened in Iceland today, where the Government stepped in to save another of the country's major banks, Landsbanki under sweeping new powers which came into force yesterday – amid warnings that the entire country could go bankrupt.

It is the second nationalisation in little more than a week after ministers were involved in a rescue of rival Glitnir.

The wider Footsie made modest gains – mostly driven by a recovering oil price which bounced back slightly after hitting an eight-month low yesterday. Oil giants BP and Royal Dutch Shell both advanced around 4%.

The Treasury has refused to comment on Mr Darling's meeting with the banks.

Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman Vince Cable said: "It looks as if RBS are the latest victim of a speculative attack. The continuing uncertainty over the Government's intentions is proving very damaging.

"There is a growing political consensus around the ideas the Liberal Democrats have set out for the Government injecting capital into banks in exchange for shares. This will produce income for the Government and eventual profit for taxpayers from a future sale.

"There must be no question whatsoever of ministers just handing over taxpayers' money to banks or taking on their bad loans. Any injection of funds must be part of a comprehensive programme which fully protects taxpayers' interests.

"We're effectively talking about part-nationalisation, and there is no point in trying to conceal that. The Government must come clean on its plans very quickly, otherwise continued uncertainty will force more banks to the wall.

"It is much more sensible to deal with this proactively, rather than through a succession of collapses like those of Bradford & Bingley or Northern Rock."


Government set to take £50bn stake in Britain's top banks

BILL JAMIESON & LINDSAY McINTOSH


THE government is preparing to buy a huge stake in Britain's stricken banks to boost confidence in the economy as the freefall in global markets continues.

News of the drastic measure emerged after the UK's leading shares suffered their biggest ever one-day fall and as European governments failed to agree a common strategy in their war against the global financial crisis.

Under the plan, to be announced later this week, The Scotsman understands that the government will inject between £30 billion and £50 billion into the banks, with more to follow if required.

In return, the state will receive preference shares to be held for the duration of the crisis. The four key banks involved are believed to be HBOS, Lloyds TSB, Barclays and Royal Bank of Scotland.

They are understood to have agreed the capital injection in outline over the weekend and in further discussions yesterday. Indeed, yesterday's massive sell-off of bank shares leaves them with no alternative.

However, the move will raise concerns over the exposure of taxpayers to financial risk, following the use of public funds to nationalise the stricken bank Northern Rock earlier this year.

The FTSE 100 fell 7.85 per cent, wiping about £93 billion off the value of the UK's largest firms – the biggest percentage fall since the Black Monday of 1987 and the largest points fall since the index was launched in 1984.

No company was spared the agony, but the Edinburgh-based banks RBS and HBOS were among the biggest losers, with crashes of 20.46 per cent and 19.8 per cent.

RBS saw its credit rating brought down a notch by Standard & Poor's, the rating agency, indicating less certainty among key analysts as to its position. A House of Commons statement by Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, did nothing to ease the panic, as confusion reigned over what action individual European countries were taking to try to avert the crisis.

In the United States, the main Dow Jones share index fell sharply – further evidence that the American government's $700 billion (£380 billion) bail-out had not proved to be the silver bullet that many predicted it would be.

The Dow recovered in erratic trading to a loss of 369.88 points, or 3.58 per cent, to close at 9,955.50, dropping below the 10,000 mark for the first time since October, 2004.

At its worst point, the Dow was down more than 800 points, an intraday record – surpassing its previous record for a one-day decline, 778, which was set a week ago.

Underlining the economic devastation, a new report today by the British Chambers of Commerce will say that the UK is already in a recession, with business confidence, profits and turnover at record lows and unemployment set to rise by up to 350,000 in the next year.

The authoritative survey of 5,000 firms by the British Chambers of Commerce shows a worsening economic outlook and rising unemployment amid a "collapse" in confidence across all sectors of industry. In addition, the country's largest insolvency specialist has warned that more than 300 UK retailers are likely to go under in the new year, when banks cut off their lifeline funding.

Two arguments have made the unprecedented government intervention in Britain's banks an urgent necessity.

One is that they are unable, in the current chaotic conditions, to raise fresh capital from their own shareholders.

HBOS, RBS and Barclays have already raised extra capital by way of rights issues and shareholders would simply balk at a further cash request. The second is that the outlook for the global economy has nosedived over the past few weeks and banks will need additional liquidity in which to operate as trading conditions worldwide worsen.

Separate arrangements may be made for HSBC and the Spanish bank Santander, which owns Abbey and has just bought the retail operations of Bradford & Bingley.

Although they make the bulk of their profits overseas, they also have substantial operations in the UK.

The fine details have still to be worked out between government ministers and the banks over the next couple of days, but authoritative sources say that a deal should be announced before the end of the week.

Speaking to the United Jewish Israel Appeal in London last night, Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, said the government was ready to take action to prevent "irresponsible risk-taking" by banks and other financial institutions.

The cash injection will be designed to lift the banks' "tier one" capital ratios – the amount of capital a bank is expected to hold to allow it to absorb losses but still protect its depositors – from about 6 per cent to between 7 and 8 per cent.

Further help for the banking system may come on Thursday with a half-point cut in interest rates.

While the Bank of England's monetary policy committee will maintain its independence, events of recent days, and in particular the scale and savagery of the falls in stock markets yesterday, should compel members to reduce rates at the earliest opportunity – and that is when they hold their regularly monthly meeting this week.

Only two days after European leaders had assembled to find a united way forward, cracks were apparent, with countries taking unilateral action.

Confusion reigned over whether Germany had guaranteed to back all savings, after Angela Merkel, the chancellor, seemed to make such a statement on Sunday, only for sources to claim that she had not intended for legislation to be drafted to back it up.

Denmark, Greece, Ireland and Austria have given their own guarantees, while Spain hinted yesterday that it might do the same.

Iceland – hugely exposed to the turmoil because of its reliance on banks – teetered precariously close to total economic chaos, as its government belatedly issued a guarantee but failed to deliver a wider escape plan.

In his speech to the Commons, Mr Darling said the £50,000 savings guarantee would come into force today, and that the Financial Services Authority would look at raising the threshold further.

But even as he spoke, markets were tumbling around the world. There were no winners on the FTSE 100, which fell almost 8 per cent, while the Dow Jones fell below the 10,000-mark for the first time in four years.

"Another Monday, another banking crisis," said Manoj Ladwa, a senior trader at ETX Capital. "Just when the market thinks it has found a base level, there's another jolt to the system. Black Mondays used to be a once-a-decade event, now they're coming along more regularly than a London bus."


Bill Jamieson: Either this desperate plan works or the economy is done for

Q&A: How new safety net for savings could benefit you

'Recession here and 350,000 jobs will go'

More than 300 retailers could go bust after Christmas

The full article contains 1850 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 10:01:16
They can't blame short sellers now.
2

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 10:16:47
1 George#

Twisted view of the world. RBS shares fall and your first thought is to snipe at Salmond. Ant bad news for Scotland is excellent news for the weasel like unionists seems to be the message over the past few weeks!
3

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 10:22:50
2 Nevski
That was not a swipe a Salmond and I am not taking pleasure in this - far from it. I still hold shares in RBS so why on earth would I view this as excellent news.

The point I was making when I mentioned short sellers is that so many people (not just Alex Salmond) have called this wrong in the past and need to look at things more rationally.
4

Bigwull,

edinburgh 07/10/2008 10:27:47
1 WHAT MAKES YOU THINK THEY'RE NOT STILL AT IT?
5

K McDonald,

Glasgow 07/10/2008 10:28:39
Who is Salmond going to blame for RBS's predicament? Anyone except his incompetent Embra banker buddies is my guess.

6

,

07/10/2008 10:30:16
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
7

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 10:31:08
4 bigwull
Short selling was stopped weeks ago.
8

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 10:32:26
#2 Absolute rubbish Nevsky. What has become clear over the past few weeks in fact is that this idea that someone who supports Scotland within the union is somehow "anti-Scottish" is unsupportable claptrap.

The simplistic idea that an independent Scotland would somehow be better placed to weather the storms in global capitalism is at best unproven, but from where I sit it appears utterly about-face. Right now we are gaining a great deal of strength from being part of the world's fifth largest economy, and from being part of the world's biggest economic union.

How do you think the markets would respond to an independence referendum today?
9

K McDonald,

07/10/2008 10:33:02
4 Bigwull,edinburgh 07/10/2008 10:27:47
1 WHAT MAKES YOU THINK THEY'RE NOT STILL AT IT?>>>>

Big Yin. It's all about CONFIDENCE! A commodity that has deserted RBS, as it did HBOS. All because the comany's management screwed up. Simple as that. Salmond has been pointing the finger at everyone except his banker mates - all "fully qualified economists", no doubt.
10

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 10:35:20
#6 Silly.
11

danielrober,

07/10/2008 10:36:14
Well i still need banking services and i have faith in these banks to deliver them. I am also very confident that the Prime Minister working with banks and the other leaders in politics and trade can deliver.

In a few months this will be over and business will still be moving. In Spring I'm still opening a tiny retail unit in London. In the Autumn I'm still opening up a slightly larger (but still tiny) unit in Glasgow to run sales in Northern Britain. In 2010 I expect to be employing about 5-10 people on a full-time/part-time mix (split between London and Glasgow).

The economy is still moving, it just recovering from one heck of a party. Some drank to much, maybe some of us did not drink enough. The point is just like parties, hang overs also go away.

Its just time to work harder that's all. All hands to the pumps and noses to the grind stones etc, etc.
12

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 10:42:26
8 Duncan#

Any nationalist reading any of the posts over the past few weeks will realise that unionists such as yourself have constantly used what is happening to reinforce your view that Scotland is better in the UK...you are using it as a political point..some unionists even to the point of unbridled joy!

Nowhere has anyone said that Scotland would be immune to world markets, just nonsense.

But unlike Norway who are insulated to a great extent because of their HUGE reserves of cash, Scotland is suffering becuase it has NEVER instituted it's own fiscal policy..this is as a direct result of Westminster and the union!

Scotland's strength to date in the union is that 2 English banks have failed (Scots taxpayers will pay for this of course)...a country NOW in recession...public borrowing at a record high..house prices collapsing...a Scottish institution practically given away...job losses in Scotland as a result...


Some benefit we are getting, you are right! Take a reality check!
13

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 10:45:30
danielrober#

Great time to open a business when the country is heading for recession unless you are in the house re-posession business!
14

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 10:45:42
#11 That's the spirit. Even an economy that isn't growing, or one that is shrinking, is still full of opportunity.
15

Huntly loon,

Aberdeenshire 07/10/2008 10:46:06
I think we are being delivered this banking crisis in dribs and drabs. Nothing any politicians intend to do will stop it. We were told it was the sub-prime market in the USA. Then Northern Rock. Then back to the States with 'Freddie' and 'Fannie' The Lehman, AIG etc. Congress thought they had sorted out. A sticking plaster for their elections. This week the Europeans. Germany's Hypo Real estate, Fortis, the Iceland banks. Ireland, Greece etc underwriting their banks.

Today it is the freezing of the Iceland internet bank, the fall in the share price of RBS. There is no floor which the financial systtem is not going to fall through. It did not start with the American subprime. It began when the west started living off credit, spending money it did not have. Governments cannot print money to get us out of this crisis. We will become the Weimar Republic or Zimbabwe if we do. The commodities, wealth and endevour are now in the hands of Russians, the Arabs and the Chinese. We are now bust living on borrowed time. Only when the west realises that it is now a third world power and faces up to adopting the lifestyle to match its means, then this crisis will not have reached its endgame.
16

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 10:46:21
12 Nevski
"Scotland's strength to date in the union is that 2 English banks have failed (Scots taxpayers will pay for this of course)..."

The latest news is that the govt are going to make £79bn available for RBS and Barclays.
17

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 10:48:19
#12 Of course Scotland has a fiscal policy! It is part of the UK's!

What is utterly ridiculous is that you list all of the ills currently facing our economy and then blame "the union" for them. As if an independent Scotland would be faring ANY differently.

And don't give me "if we had been independent 30 years ago". Your argument is that we should become independent now. Explain how exactly that would help.
18

David MacVicar,

web 07/10/2008 10:48:33
The Scotsman forgets to mention that Johnston press is also down another 16% today. Sub-prime toxic Journalism is also taking a knock?
19

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 10:53:02
15 Huntly
Let us hope that Putin is not trying to stir things up against NATO. I have just seen on Bloomberg that Iceland has been bailed out by Russia with a $5bn loan - that is the equivalent of about $20,000 for every person in Iceland. Bearing in mind that Iceland is a NATO memebr located in the North Atlantic, is Putin doing this out of sympathy to the people of Iceland or does he want to use this as a lever of power and influence.
20

David MacVicar,

web 07/10/2008 10:55:25
17 Duncan in Edinburgh you make some fair points.

However if the past 40 years is any guideline then any measure that the UK now makes will only take into account the needs of the South and if that means sacrificing or at best ignoring the North of the UK then that is what will happen. If you think anything else is the case then you are seriously deluded.

In expectation of a rebuttal, please include some examples of where the UK has intervened in Scotland to safeguard Scottish interests over the South, should be interesting?
21

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 11:04:12
#20 The fundamental error you make here is the implicit assumption that bolstering our economic powerhouse (the south east) is somehow bad for the country. They don't do it to make northerners' lives a misery! They do it because it is in the best interests of the country's economy.

If we aren't prepared to share the pain of interest rates set on the basis of what the south east needs, we shouldn't have accepted the benefits of that economic powerhouse for the past decade.

We invest in London because the money made in London is spent all over the UK.

If you want a separate fiscal policy for Scotland then you cannot logically avoid wanting to subdivide fiscal policy between the regions of England, and then between the central belt and the highlands and lowlands in Scotland.

How much subdivision do you want? Independence for Freuchie?
22

Grant,

Scotland 07/10/2008 11:07:05
The idea that Scotland being in the Union is some kind of safeguard to ameliorate the global financial crisis is as intellectually bankrupt as saying an independent Scotland would be unaffected by world economic turbulence.

The whole global financial crisis has shattered the illusion that "big is better" or that interconnectedness is the best way to deal with the world. Not that I advocate a move back to autarky and protectionism. But a fundamental appraisal of the way international financial flows operate is needed, as is a return to some kind of localism. That will mean a transfer of financial and economic powers from huge centralised beheamoths like the Treasury and Bank of England to smaller units of control.
23

Huntly loon,

Aberdeenshire 07/10/2008 11:07:56
I know we are on opposite sides of the fence when it comes to Scottish independence, but I agree with you that there are geo-political games going on beneath the surface which are being kept from us. The Georgia crisis was a 'dipping the toe in the water' Bailing out Iceland is Russia's next chess move. Their possession of the oil and gas that keeps Europe warm has not been used yet in the game. this is about Russia and Nato. China held the grandest olympics. it will never be matched and China knows it. They are sitting in the wings quietly. The perfect hosts plying their guests with drink, waiting for the drunks to start making fools of themselves before they have to throw them out into the street, and get the house back to themselves. Once Russia and the west are finished with each other the Chinese will be the world's Superpower.
24

The Strategist,

07/10/2008 11:08:57
I do not believe that any taxpayers money should be given to these banks until they change their management teams. They are self evidently not the brightest coins in the cash box. Now, they are alienating the small business community by making them pay even more for overdraft and loan facilities.

As I've said before - we need at least one new bank.. The ones we have now are morally if not technically corrupt.
25

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 11:11:26
#22 So neither union nor independence is good for us; neither isolationism nor inter-connectedness are beneficial things. It's almost as if you are suggesting that the best model for the world is a disparate set of nation states collaborating where appropriate.

Quite brilliant. Do you have a name for your groundbreaking theory?
26

Fairfax,

07/10/2008 11:14:37
Ugly George (19): "I have just seen on Bloomberg that Iceland has been bailed out by Russia with a $5bn loan"

According to hemscott.com, it's 4 billion Euros (i.e. $5.4 billion). I agree with your analysis: there ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

It's particularly surprising that they have received nothing from Norway, Sweden and Denmark.
27

Fairfax,

07/10/2008 11:20:38
David MacVicar (20): "However if the past 40 years is any guideline then any measure that the UK now makes will only take into account the needs of the South"

That is not the lesson of Britain post-war. Until the 1980s, British economic policy supported heavy industry, despite its union-crippled inefficiency -- effectively the South was used to support heavy industry, based overwhelmingly in North. All that occurred in the 1980s is that the subsidy was ended.

Even in this current crisis, I wonder if NR and B&B would have been saved if their base had not been Labour heartlands.
28

New Town Resident,

07/10/2008 11:27:08
~27. Methinks they are proving to the EU that they have an alternative, and very wise too. No need to hand over control of their fish and energy resources which is what the EU demands. Scots Nats should note. Expect Iceland will now maybe get Euro membership but keep their Norway model of resource control.



29

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 07/10/2008 11:30:18
I assume that the Westminster Government will now Nationalise RBS and HBoS.
30

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 07/10/2008 11:32:41
#8 Duncan

"Right now we are gaining a great deal of strength from being part of the world's fifth largest economy, and from being part of the world's biggest economic union."

You REALLY believe that Duncan?
31

David MacVicar,

web 07/10/2008 11:34:40
Duncan and Fairfax, thanks for not providing any of the examples I asked, not such a failure though since there aren't any!

You can dissaemble the whys and whats how you want, the reinvigeration of the South was fianced from AAA international loans backed by North sea oil and the now available Mcrone report showed this in part, plus the effects of an independent Scotland to a rump UK.

Fater, Northern and Scottish industry was sacrificed while at the same time the South was being bankrolled. This is irrefutable. Meantime Scotland was being told we were a basket case while the UK politicians knew the opposite. This is simply unforgivable.

So yes we are now all in the M E R D E together but it would have been in a different context if we had been independent and we are still better governing ourselves with financial accountability than under the cosh of a bunch of self serving London central liars using obfuscation as their daily bread to save the union.

'Britain stronger together weaker apart' The question is for whom is this true?
32

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 07/10/2008 11:35:28
#21 Duncan

How much money do you think that London "makes"?
33

David MacVicar,

web 07/10/2008 11:38:26
Apologies for typos in previous post...the argument remains.
34

New Town Resident,

07/10/2008 11:38:35
-22. I agree 100% with you re smaller local financial units - the USA and Germany are much better in this regard. So were we once. Personally always backed mutuals for the reasons you set out and so voted against the demutualisation of our 2 big mutuals (TSB and Standard) and lost. Also I'm now with the UK's biggest mutual, Nationwide, and thats the only vote I've won! How many Scots voted for the TSB, Standard and HBOS deals I wonder compared with the citizens of the English Midlands where I think most of the Nationwide voters live (they are from Northampton by origin). Unfortunately I don't think EU financial competition rules will ever protect mutuals per se - think they survive in Germany because effectively they are local authority municipals and in the USA because of state laws that would not be permitted in the EU financial framework structures. But maybe the surviving mutuals could do a lot more with their rule books? Certainly Nationwide seems to have made it much harder to get a demutualisation vote through and its a pity Crombie was allowed to get away with Standard in my view. Interested to know what new Standard shareholders think now and whther they are still happy with demutualisation?
35

democracy,

Scottish Borders 07/10/2008 11:39:54
Jim Murphy the new so called Scottish Secretary says only on Sunday that the UK and Europe are not in crisis but Alex Salmond's Arc of Prosperity IS!

Trying to score cheap political points at this early stage after saying he would have an amicable relationship with the First Minister, who is he kidding!

It is now blatantly obvious that his initial statement on TV in his new post, proves how inept he is going to be when he comments on the economy and gets it so wrong first time.

The very next days headlines made him look silly, but that was nothing compared to todays Headlines "RBS shares plummet on another day of financial woe"
"Car sales stall as economy hits the skids"
"RBS shares fall under £1 after bail-out fears"

Same problems all over Europe AND Asia, yet Jim Murphy says in his first statement on TV that UK and Europe are not in crisis, just to try and make a stupid little point in an attempt to belittle our First Minister.

This man has already shown us all what a clown he is, with exceptionally bad judgement!!!
36

Huntly loon,

Aberdeenshire 07/10/2008 11:40:39
There was a generally perceived wisdom that the City of London is the power house of the UK economy and generated wealth. I have never believed this. It does not create wealth, merely creams to itself the wealth created by others.

There is only one source of weatlth and that is what nature has provided. Oil, minerals and other exhaustible resources and renewables, such as, wind/solar/hydro power, agriculture, fishing and forestry. All other industries derive from processing these and adding value. At the top of this food chain is the public services and financial institutions who take their cut through tax and interest. But they do not add to the wealth. The financial insttiutions began using there cut to generate more money, by loaning and trading their cut. This was one large game of musical chairs and pass the parcel. The music has now stopped. The parcel is only wrapping. There is nothing in the box in the middle.
37

Proximaking,

Aberdeen 07/10/2008 11:42:15
I think the Huntly loon is talking a lot of sense but not about China. There is however one power sitting watching and waiting and the time will soon be here for them to strike. "The Empire Strikes Back", ...... yup it's the good old UK and I fear for anyone who gets on the wrong side of us, China and Salmond included. Gordon Brown doesn't look in the least bit worried to me but everyone else does, including the Chinese who couldn't even be honest enough to let a little buck-toothed leprechaun sing the song, ... hardly the actions of the world's next superpower. The game someone is playing seems to be going to plan but a two year old could tell you that by now. Watch out next for massive instability in China as the reality bites that they have no markets to send goods to and all of those idle hands are found work but not by the Chinese government. We are in the end game of capitalism and totalitarianism all around the world. Interesting times. lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll llllllllllllllllllll
38

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 11:49:57
40 Proximaking
"We are in the end game of capitalism and totalitarianism all around the world."

This is precisely what many people were saying after the Wall St crash of 1929. It seemed to them obvious that the crash spelt the end of capitalism and the whole world would follow the the newly formed model of Soviet Socialism. It didn't work out that way though did it?
39

Fairfax,

07/10/2008 12:05:09
David MacVicar (34): "Duncan and Fairfax, thanks for not providing any of the examples I asked, not such a failure though since there aren't any!"

I implicitly provided you with several examples: union-crippled heavy industry which failed once subsidies ended in the 1980s.

"the reinvigeration of the South was fianced from AAA international loans backed by North sea oil"

North Sea Oil was indeed important in the late 1970s and very early 1980s. Once socialism had been abandoned, its importance diminished. Sadly Scotland missed its moment in 1979, or thereabouts.

"it would have been in a different context if we had been independent and we are still better governing ourselves with financial accountability"

It might have been. Then again, Norway's banking system suffered systemic collapse in the early 1990s was followed by the nationalization of their 3 largest banks. Independence is therefore neither necessary nor sufficient for avoiding financial crises. I think it's much more likely that, had Scotland seceded in (say) 1979, its banks would now be in roughly the same position, i.e. with liabilities many times Scotland's GDP. Still, if nationalization of RBS and HBOS now becomes necessary, you can continue to blame all the ills of Scotland on the evil English who have subsumed Scotland's banks -- there's always a silver lining.




40

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 12:06:27
35 Connaughtboy
Recent extract from an analysis by Oxford Economics

"London pays £16 billion more in taxes than the Government spends in the capital, Oxford Economics said — equivalent to more than £2,000 for every person in the city."

41

Huntly loon,

Aberdeenshire 07/10/2008 12:07:04
The world economy is the sum total of the producers and the consumers. When the net producers (the Russians, Arabs and Chinese) realise that the net consumers (USA and Europe) cannot pay them, they will take whatever assets the net consumers still have and start consuming the produce themselves. The west will be left with few assets that they can call their own and will have to survive on their own produce, where production and consumption are in balance. At the moment they are not. Only when our population returns to living within our means without credit will this equilibrium be restored. Our present crisis is the shifting of these tectonic plates as the earthquakes return the faultlines to equilibrium
42

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 07/10/2008 12:24:02
No doubt Alex Salmond will chair a summit on this.
43

The_Reiver,

07/10/2008 12:25:49
As this crisis proceeds, the Right Dishonourable Alex Salmond is rapidly becoming the most pathetic figure. He's just like a wee boy who wants to play football with the big boys but is left shouting pointless suggestions from the side line. Thank God we don't have independence otherwise we'd be screwed like Iceland.
44

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 07/10/2008 12:26:27
45

The Genuine - if Salmond had any brains, he'd be campaigning for the nationalisation of financial institutions and the renationalisation of public utilities.
45

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 07/10/2008 12:28:49
47

JDT, I seem to remember that you were a staunch opponent of the Government's decision to help Northern Rock. Why the change in position? Your memory may be failing. Mine isn't.
46

Fairfax,

07/10/2008 12:32:06
JayDeeTee (47): "Eurpean countries are all looking after their own banks and guaranteeing ALL deposits"

Few of them have actually done so yet. In particular, neither France, Germany, nor Italy have acted in this way, although their leaders have hinted that they would do so, in so doing causing confusion The smaller economies which have formally guaranteed their deposits are bluffing, since their GDPs are substantially less then those deposits.
47

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 12:37:32
#47 No major economy has done this. Germany, it emerges, was making a "political statement" not a banking guarantee, when Merkel said all deposits were safe.
48

Zedd,

Fife 07/10/2008 12:39:21
I know that failing banks hurt everyone, but I can't help feeling unsympathetic, at least to those higher up the ladder. I have been overcharged, exploited as revenue fodder and sold the wrong financial products throughout my life. There was no empathy for my liquidity problems! How ironic that a lack of trust brings it all crashing down.
49

AJ Fife,

07/10/2008 12:41:59
And so the Westminster induced destruction of Scotland continuies.

Thankfully we have Mr Salmond at the tiller. If allowed, Scotland's Leader could save Scottish businesses, Scottish workers and the Scottish economy. However, to do that, we need to break free from the desperate clutches of Westminster!

50

danielrober,

07/10/2008 12:44:48
# 13 Nevsky,Moscow

The economy still keeps on moving, in spite of politics and international finance. The reason why Northern Britain more than almost anywhere else in Europe was hit so hard in the 70's and 80's was that we stopped opening up new businesses. People became enthralled with higher factors, issues and concerns rather than daily needs. Effort went into nebulous problems for house designs for millions, instead of fixing the leaking roof.

Hard working kids are still going to be leaving school and university looking for work and offering excellent benefits to employers. Customers still want to replace old things with new stuff and we all still need to eat.

So maybe i will not be a millionaire by 2014, it might now be 2018/2019. I might not have 10 full-time staff in 2010. It might now be 5 part-time staff in 2010, but they are still going to be new jobs. Business moves on and economies such as the Scotland/UK have a lot of benefits to offer and enjoy.

So lets all calm down a little, maybe have a beer, glass of wine or a decent scotch.
51

danielrober,

07/10/2008 12:49:06
# 54 AJ Fife,

Southern Britain has quite a lot to offer. One of the things it offers is a constantly modernising dialect.

I do believe your comment can be replied to with the phrase - R U a nutter. Where u living mate. U need a drink.
52

Ursus arctos horribilis,

07/10/2008 12:50:15
#23 &40 Intersting posts.

For those of us interested in the geo-political consequences of all this there was an interesting article in the Washington Post last week-"Financial Hubs See an Opening At The Top"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/30/AR2008093002718.html?sid=ST2008100100058&s_pos=


Personally I believe the root cause of the Banking Crisis is that the US has been living beyond its means for the past twenty odd years as evidenced by their massive balance of payments deficit-this was unsustainable.

I believe what we are witnessing is merely part of a major re-alignment betwen east and west and would back China to be a big winner-that is not to say China does not have problems or to prematurely write the US off as they have many assets-not to mention the most powerful armed forces in the world.

As for the UK -I can see only doom and gloom-unlike the last time when Liebour mis-management almost ruined the country there is nothing left for the incoming Tory Government left to privatise.


As to Russia baling out Iceland -in return for what-possibly a new home for the Black Sea Fleet? That was on the cards-Europe is hardly in a position to help and presumably Putin sees this as a counter to NATO trying to encircle Russia. This should set the alarm bells ringing-Iceland will suddenly find many new friends!
53

AJ Fife,

07/10/2008 12:54:40
#56,

Very Vicki Pollard!

Very Unionist.

Very daniel robber

Very dunc

54

John Cameron,

St Andrews 07/10/2008 13:08:48
My greatest fear is that Gordon Brown has a cunning plan to save us all. Is it possible that he can be persuaded to hide away in the bunker at No 10 chewing his fingernails and the odd carpet? I am sure we will all pull through as long as he does not try to help.
55

Huntly loon,

Aberdeenshire 07/10/2008 13:11:22
Whether you like him or loathe him Salmond, having been an economist in a major bank (his oil formulae is still used in the industry) is at least well placed to understand the present banking crisis and capable of making sensible proposals in its wake. Whether Scotland was independent or not is of little matter in this debate as all sizes of country and economies are affected. the USA is as much a victim as Iceland, Germany or Ireland. To impute that the UK is the perfect size to weather the storm is Unionist delusion just as saying an independent Scotland would not have been affected. The problem is larger than these petty points.
As for Iceland, it was always a puzzlement how they bought their way into so many retail businesses in the UK aqs these are the first to feel the cold draughts. The Icelanders for their modest population are well provided in resources after all they have survived there since the darkages without the need for financial institutions. They have not sought EU membership and I'm sure have no desire to return the the Danish fold, so their present predicament has no relevance to whether Scotland could stand on its own. It is a non sequitur.

Whether a country is successful or not is based on the resourcefulness of its population and the sound judgement of its leaders.
56

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 13:16:06
#58 The problem is you actually believe the rubbish you spout.

Not that it is terribly relevant but Britain is in no way the worst hit economy in Europe! Do you even understand what just happened in Ireland? Do you seriously see that move as a triumph, evidence of strength? You are woefully uninformed if so. Ireland's act was one of desperation, and they have ended up making a guarantee they simply cannot back up, simply because they were left with no other option. To suggest that they are in a better position than the UK is - well, breathtakingly stupid.

Face painting and victimhood will do nothing for us now; you are dismissed. You lost.
57

Fairfax,

07/10/2008 13:38:04
JayDeeTee (60): ""The smaller economies which have formally guaranteed their deposits are bluffing, since their GDPs are substantially less then those deposits."

Are they lying then?"

In some cases, I suspect so, depending on other national assets. That's not to say that there's no truth to their statements: they would act to pay depositors if a single bank collapsed, for example. In the worst cases, such as Iceland, I cannot see how they can avoid financial collapse without outside help, hopefully from Scandinavian nations rather than Russia. They have reached the point at which default becomes feasible.
58

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

07/10/2008 13:42:57
Call me a cynic but there is something awfully artificial about today's RBS fall. I have a really bad feeling that somebody has been at it with a false rumour - that the RBS needed a capital injection from the government. That would be enough to drive down the share price so they can buy up cheap stock. When the price rises on the back of the rumour being proven false then they sell the stock on.

Anyone else have such a nagging doubt?
59

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 13:52:21
#66 I do not buy any argument in defence of stupidity. The only counter to stupid choices is education.

The government is not saying that Irish banks are now safer than UK banks (and quite rightly in my view, since Irish sterling deposits are essentially unbackable by the Irish government because they can only access sterling from the international money markets, and we know where they are just now) and yet people are apparently moving their money into them.

The government have been very clear that they will not allow UK private depositors' money to be risked; in just exactly the same way the Germans have. The government are telling people to leave their savings where they are. It's good advice. People are ignoring it in droves. You blame the government?
60

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

07/10/2008 13:54:53
The big problem we are facing right now is that the speculators are picking off the financial institutions one at a time. I can see merits in treating each case on its own circumstances but can also see that something needs to be done to protect all of our financial institutions. Giving a 100% guarantee is not the answer - it only deals with savers concerns and not the underlying credit shortage problems. The longer this goes on the more inclined I am to the view that the only solution is a complete or partial nationalisation of the banking industry.

Also we need to end this idiotic process of repossession that happens when a mortgagee falls behind with payments. Why on earth reposses and get no income and sell an asset for a fraction of its true value? Why not accept reduced mortgage payments spread over a longer time? Or reclaiming the property but allowing rental to be paid on the property?
61

ccc,

07/10/2008 13:56:24
#61

I agree with most of your comment. However the comment re. Salmond is a little off:

"Whether you like him or loathe him Salmond, having been an economist in a major bank (his oil formulae is still used in the industry) is at least well placed to understand the present banking crisis and capable of making sensible proposals in its wake"

I think it has been proven conclusively that most economists with banks have zero clue about the bigger picture and what is going on here. Salmond fits into that group. His blaming of the HBOS debalce on 'spivs and speculators' proves that beyond any doubt.

It is amazing how much respect is given to some of these people. Considering many of them are responsible for this mess.
62

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 13:57:15
67 Duncan#

I don't think you can blame people for moving their cash in the slightest.

Interestingly, having listened to the radio almost all of the financial big heids were on agreement that the UK government is busy chasing individual fires rather than concentrating on decisive action!

£50 billion here and £20 there as we know can be wiped off shares in an instant!
63

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 13:58:00
65 The Fed.
There may have been a rumour about RBS but it does not appear to be false. As I unberstand it, both RBS and Barclays are negotiating a bail out from the govt.
64

ccc,

07/10/2008 13:59:08
#68

"The big problem we are facing right now is that the speculators are picking off the financial institutions one at a time."

No it is not. What we are seeing is big investors dropping any banking shares they have because they have completely lost any faith in the system.

Selling shares in a company you do not have faith in is not speculation. No matter what people like Alex Salmond will tell you.
65

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 13:59:37
69#


The spive and speculators are as we speak probably making more money than they have ever made before; it's bonanza time for them, just look at the way shares are leaping about, someone is buying and selling and making billions!

Alex was spot on!
66

Huntly loon,

Aberdeenshire 07/10/2008 14:00:58
With the Icesave bank frozen (what an apt name to have given themselves), it is only a matter of time before there is a mad rush to the ATMs to take whatever cash there is available and to keep it at home in the old teacaddy. For soon no one will accept cheques, credit cards or debit cards, and cash will be used for all transactions. No trace, no record, no bank statements. No declaring it to pay tax or VAT on. The government must be bricking it.

Icesave has I hear just gone bust and the savers in the UK will have to await compensation. They will be limited to £35k.

In the same way as there was a rush to the pumps when Grangemouth went on strike, I feel a rush on the banks cannot be far off as the population stock up on cash to tide them by for emergencies. It is most worrying
67

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 14:02:33
70 Nevski
"£50 billion here and £20 there as we know can be wiped off shares in an instant!"

The money the govt is giving to banks just now is not to support their share price. It is to provide them with liquidity to carry on trading. The govt is not buying shares in these banks (RBS and Barclays) unless they plan to nationalis them.
68

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 14:08:21
73 Nevski

"The spive and speculators are as we speak probably making more money than they have ever made before; it's bonanza time for them, just look at the way shares are leaping about, someone is buying and selling and making billions!

Alex was spot on!"

Alex Salmond claimed that HBOS was a sound business which was forced into a cheap takeover by short selling. You will find it very hard to find an analyst who now agrees that this was the case.

Please tell me what practice the "spivs" are up to now. Some will be selling and some will look for opportunities to buy. Some might profit and some might lose. That is the way markets work.
69

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 14:09:08
#74 You are actively being part of the problem. Why? Why spread rumours and undermine stability?
70

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 14:11:04
73 Nevski
Please elaborate on your claim that it is "bonanza time" for spivs and speculators. If it is so easy to make huge amounts from this situation please share yopur knowledge with us on how to do it.
71

Cpt Incredible,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 14:11:09
#12 Nevsky
"But unlike Norway who are insulated to a great extent because of their HUGE reserves of cash, Scotland is suffering becuase it has NEVER instituted it's own fiscal policy..this is as a direct result of Westminster and the union!"

That statement unfortunately is the bottom line.

We need Independence from these Westminster bloodsuckers,the sooner the better.


72

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 14:23:18
78 George#

I presume that the way shares are bouncing up and down like a yo-yo indicates that someone is making money just as others are losing it...fairly obvious i would have thought.

73

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 14:24:56
12 Nevsky/Cpt Incredible

"But unlike Norway who are insulated to a great extent because of their HUGE reserves of cash, Scotland is suffering becuase it has NEVER instituted it's own fiscal policy..this is as a direct result of Westminster and the union!"

You are confusing two separate issues. Just because a govt has reserves of cash does not mean that its banks are immune from problems. Govts in US, UK, Germany, Belgium and France etc have all made huge amounts of cash available for banks in trouble. None of the present problems(except perhaps in Iceland) have been caused by govts not having cash to support their banks.

Banks in Norway went through a similar problem to the current one back in 1991 and were nationalised just as Northern Rock was.
74

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 14:26:27
What happens if there is a run on RBS, can the government afford a bail-out of that magnitude?

Suddenly the question that unionists have applied to the fiscal strength of an independent Scotland might well be applied to the UK.

Anyone know the value of RBS..i am guessing this one is not £50 billion?

75

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 14:26:32
81 Indeed
But how do you guarantee that you are the one who is making it and not losing it. That is the crucial aspect.
76

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 14:28:53
#83 "Anyone know the value of RBS".

An insightful query on an article the subject of which is the share price of RBS...
77

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 14:28:53
84 George#

Start a rumour on the trading floor?
78

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 14:29:36
83 Nevski
Latest Market capialistion of RBS is £19bn. However this will be different from the amount it will need to refinance and carry on trading which will probably be more.
79

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 14:33:32
86 Nevski
If only it were that easy. Everybody knows that people might start rumours to ramp up or run down prices. Rumours only have any effect if they are credible and realistic and seem to be borne out by circumstances. otherwise they are just obvoius attempts to ramp up or run down in which case you might well be the one holding the wrong postion and lose out.
80

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 14:41:12
George#

Well if RBS does go to the wall, Iceland will not be the only country with an economy on the verge of collapse:

'This is a huge institution with a £1,900bn balance sheet – three times the size of HBOS, which was rescued last month by Lloyds TSB. If the markets can give up on RBS, one of the ten largest banks in the world, all bets on Britain's and the world's financial system are off. Who knows what might happen next'
81

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 14:46:49
#89 That's right Dave. What's even cleverer is that he managed to turn the entire world's financial systems to achieving this aim. Shame about those multi-billion dollar companies going bust but at least he's undermined Scotland's bid for independence.
82

Rufus T. Firefly,

07/10/2008 15:01:52
Hey Nevski, you said

"If the markets can give up on RBS, one of the ten largest banks in the world".

RBS is one of the 10 largest banks in the world?

Based on what?
83

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 07/10/2008 15:03:59
The PM and Chancellor are getting a battering from all financial commentators. Darling's inaction is starting to become dangerous. These guys are seriously out of their depth.
84

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 15:05:39
#92 I've finally got it Dave. You've opened my eyes. And I now realise also that Brown was responsible not only for 9/11, but also the faking of the moon landings and the assassination of JFK. How blind I've been! David Icke Was SO right!
85

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 15:05:56
93 Rufus#

Based on an article in the Telegraph bone-head!
86

Rufus T. Firefly,

07/10/2008 15:12:17
You are so stupid it is terrifying.

I wanted to know on what basis RBS was deemed to be one of the ten largest banks in the world.

Was it by Market Cap?

But because you are a cutter and paster and know next to nothing all you can reply with is the Daily Telegraph.

What a plonker you are.

87

David MacVicar,

web 07/10/2008 15:16:58
42 Fairfax, you can argue that you implicitly answered my question, I beg to differ. Stating that dismantling Scottish industry in order to kill the unions was somehow putting Scottish interests 'implicitly' first is bizarre, but you must have your reasons.

However I categorically did not state "you can continue to blame all the ills of Scotland on the evil English who have subsumed Scotland's banks". Please retract. I only referred to "UK politicians" and just to clarify for the record, I hold Scottish British establishment ones to blame most of all.

It is they who have most of all generated resentment between the Scottish and English but that is another debate.
88

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 15:17:16
98 Rufus#

I think everyone knew RBS was one of the largest banks in the world didn't they? What difference does Market Cap or Andy Cap make?

Anyway any comment on your leader Brown and his strong leadership? He might just be sleep-walking (or hiding as he is a coward as usual) the UK into economic collapse; every commentator is screaming at him to do somethign..no doubt he is in his library reading through Adam Smith or phoning Margaret for advice.

This man in INCAPABLE of running the country and is a joke now!

89

Rufus T. Firefly,

07/10/2008 15:21:18
#98 Nevski that is, the Norwegian Ambassador.

90

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 15:24:41
One gets the feeling reading some of the latest headlines that the guns are our for Brown and Darling big time.

dither, dither, dither
91

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 15:24:49
#101 What do you suggest? Brown resigns and creates a leadership vacuum at a moment of great weakness for the country? Immediate independence for Scotland without troubling the electorate with any semblance of democracy?

What we have to do is create unity around the leaders we have now. It is the ONLY practical way to deal with the situation. Salmond should be backing Gordon to the hilt instead of continuing to pick fights. For once Cameron has it right.
92

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 07/10/2008 15:31:30
#43 george

"London pays £16 billion more in taxes than the Government spends in the capital, Oxford Economics said equivalent to more than £2,000 for every person in the city."

I think you would have to define what you mean by "London pays". As we all know, a company headquartered in London is not necessarily generating the wealth there. I would suggest that relatively little wealth is created in London.
93

Hamish Scott,

07/10/2008 15:33:23
#104
That would be a good star. Brown IS a leadership vacuum
94

Hamish Scott,

07/10/2008 15:33:23
#104
That would be a good star. Brown IS a leadership vacuum
95

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 15:35:12
104 Duncan#

The fact is that events all along this sorry tale are outstriping the ability of Brown and Darling to act.

What needs to be done is for Brown to pull his finger out along with Darling and do something decisive. They are beginning to look completely clueless!

Duncan, you seem to want sympathy for Gordon. Sorry i am afraid he is the one who created this whole mess in the first place; he is the one who encouraged the irresponsibility of the banks in the first place when he was chancellor and now he could be presiding over the complete collapse of the economy because of his complete lack of leadership.

Salmond asked for government backing for all the banks which was the right course of action as far as i can see for which he was called a clown.

Now other European countries have done it with the falling markets it is inevitable consequence along with the part-nationalisation of the banks.

But Brown has to get on with it and to stop dithering!
96

Hamish Scott,

07/10/2008 15:38:47
Managed to post 106/107 by accident

#104

That would be a good start. Brown IS a leadership vacuum. A leader would bring some confidence. An independent Scotland under Alex Salmond, a man who will go down in history as one of the greatest ever Scots and the only statesman of his generation in the British Isles. That would get us back on the road not only to recovery but to a level of prosperity and social wellbeing we have never experienced.
97

Fairfax,

07/10/2008 15:40:03
David MacVicar (100): "Stating that dismantling Scottish industry in order to kill the unions was somehow putting Scottish interests 'implicitly' first is bizarre"

The Unions had already effectively dismantled almost all of British heavy industry; providing funding for those remnants was the life support provided. In the 1980s Thatcher merely removed life-support.

"However I categorically did not state "you can continue to blame all the ills of Scotland on the evil English who have subsumed Scotland's banks". Please retract."

Many of your posts refer to the English, albeit via circumlocution and implication. There seems to be little to retract: if RBS or HBOS are nationalized, even partly, I predict you will blame the English.
98

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 07/10/2008 15:40:44
#63 duncan

A fair number of experts seem to agree with what Ireland did. Time will tell whether they did the right thing. As for them doing it out of "desperation", you have no way of knowing this.
99

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 07/10/2008 15:43:58
#67 duncan.

Which government are you referring to? It is by no means clear from your post.

Also, why do your so easily resort to using words like "stupid". This is a debate about the global economy !
100

Rufus T. Firefly,

07/10/2008 15:46:04
101 Nevsky

"I think everyone knew RBS was one of the largest banks in the world didn't they? What difference does Market Cap or Andy Cap make?"

That statement certainly highlights your inability to understand simple concepts.

The point I was going to make was that Market Capitalisation is the normal measure used to compare the size of companies.

However as you probably do not know, the market capitalisation is based on share price. So if the current run on RBS continues then they will soon not be in the Top 100 banks never mind the top 10.
101

David MacVicar,

web 07/10/2008 15:46:05
Duncan in Edinburgh,
Picking fights or standing up for Scottish interests within the current constitutional framework? This is a polarised debate.

I don't at all think RBS or HBOS would be in any better position if we had had independence, but our ability to deal with it and ability to safeguard Scottish jobs would. G Brown will protect British interests whether or not they are in line with Scottish needs, it can be no other way, indeed any other way would be unfair to the rest of the UK.

What we have though is a divide and conquer situation here on some levels. What I want to see, which certainly won't happen, is a search for and prosecution of the key perpetrators of this financial meltdown. This is an economic disaster that has been created by key decision makers in the financial sector. Auditors should be able to trace the collective guilty actors in each country, the UK in our case, then prosecute and seize all assets. As it is the door is wide open for more of the same. What will stop this happening again?

If ever there was good time for a witch hunt, this is it.
102

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 15:49:51
#111 On the contrary. The Irish Finance minster said that the action he took "had not been planned, but had been an emergency move to prevent the collapse of one Irish bank leading to the failure of another". This according to the UK and Irish governments last week.

An unplanned, emergency move to prevent large scale failures in the banking system. That's an act of desperation in my book.
103

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 15:52:35
113 Rufus#

'However as you probably do not know, the market capitalisation is based on share price. So if the current run on RBS continues then they will soon not be in the Top 100 banks never mind the top 10'

I fail to see how this has anything to do with what is actually happening. The point that was made was that if there is a run on RBS (being in the top ten) then any bank could go, they could all go!
104

Fairfax,

07/10/2008 15:52:59
connaughtboy(111): "A fair number of experts seem to agree with what Ireland did."

It probably was: they were clearly facing systemic collapse.

"As for them doing it out of "desperation", you have no way of knowing this."

Brief reflection should convince you that he is correct, since no bank nationalizes depositors' funds in this way unless absolutely necessary.
105

Fairfax,

07/10/2008 15:54:03
117: "since no bank nationalizes depositors' funds in this way unless absolutely necessary."

Of course I meant to write "since no state . . ."
106

Rufus T. Firefly,

07/10/2008 15:56:37
114 David MacVicar,

If we had independence, how would RBS be able to safeguard Scottish jobs?

The vast majority of RBS's profits are made outside Scotland.

The vast majority of their staff are employed outside Scotland.

So exactly what independence bring us in this situation?
107

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 07/10/2008 15:57:00
#115 duncan

"An unplanned, emergency move to prevent large scale failures in the banking system. That's an act of desperation in my book."

Duncan, now you're just being daft.

Your definition above is exactly what many Governments in Europe and the US have been doing over the last few weeks. Including the one at Westminster. "Desperation" or "managing a global emergency".

108

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 15:58:19
#108 I certainly don't want "sympathy" for Gordon Brown. But I will stand up to anyone who says, as you do, that "he is the one who created this whole mess in the first place" when this is unquestionably a false statement. The situation we are in is a result of a combination of factors, and you only lay it at the door of Brown because you lay EVERYTHING at the door of Brown. Do you seriously think Lehman and Wachovia's collapses were Brown's doing? AIG's troubles caused by Brown? The nationalisation of Freddie Mac and [the other lending institution which the ridiculous censor system on this messageboard won't allow me to name] Brown's decision? The over-expansion of Icelandic banks caused by Brown? The near domino-failure of the Irish banking system caused by Brown? The run on Northern Rock deposits caused by Brown? The run on B&B shares initiated by Brown?

You'r outside of reality, Nevsky.
109

danielrober,

07/10/2008 15:59:58
# 62 Huntly loon,Aberdeenshire

' Whether you like him or loathe him Salmond, having been an economist in a major bank (his oil formulae is still used in the industry) is at least well placed to understand the present banking crisis and capable of making sensible proposals in its wake. '


Is this the same oil formulae that's trashing our economy and banks at the moment? If not just how long ago was the work done? I'm given the impression Alec.S is an expert in many 'areas'. But the problem with all MP's is that they go to Parliament with ideas and experience that tend to freeze in ice. This happens because they are busy been MP's - and that's fine.

But how long ago was this 'oil formulae' experience? Which bank was it? Are his friends still at this bank?

Fair questions i think and I'm not been rude or bullying him, by asking.
110

David MacVicar,

web 07/10/2008 16:01:07
Fairfax, you can read into my posts what you want, I still did not and have not collectively blamed 'The English' for anything. I even clarified for your benefit that I put most of Scotlands issues squarely at the front door of Brit Scot establishment politicians.

If I did hate someone who is English it would indeed be Thatcher but not because she is English or because she is a woman but because of what she did. We are politically poles apart on whether she did good or bad to Scotland as a whole. I would guess that you are much more isolated in your position on Thatcher than I am, good luck with that.

111

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 07/10/2008 16:01:38
#117 Fairfax.

See #120.

You know as well as I do that duncan was trying to imply the Irish Government made a desperate move unlike the perfectly normal actions of our Government with respect to Northern Rock and Bradford and Bingley.
112

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 16:03:19
121 Duncan#

Are you seriousely suggesting that Brown had not an idea of what he was doing?

Here is a man who was chancellor for long enough and considered to have a masterful brain yet not once did it cross his mind that if the US banking sector wabbled that the UK would as well and that this wobble would be in direct proportion to the money that was secured though UK banks in the US markets?

You are suggesting that Brown had no idea that in encouraging banks to borrow and debt to rise that he never considered this?

Brown is not responsible for the world banking crisis but he IS responsible for the UK banking sectors over-reliance on it!
113

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 16:03:39
#120 No, I don't believe, until Iceland today, any other countries had yet faced what Ireland faced last week, which was a complete collapse of their banking system. The UK certainly has not faced it. Yet.
114

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 07/10/2008 16:03:48
Brown and darling, paralysed with fear !
115

The Strategist,

07/10/2008 16:04:57
#119 ... You're quite correct which raises the question as to why we're so worried about saving RBS when we should be concentrating on creating a new Scottish mutual bank. We need banks that work for us not against us and for themselves.
116

The Strategist,

07/10/2008 16:04:58
#119 ... You're quite correct which raises the question as to why we're so worried about saving RBS when we should be concentrating on creating a new Scottish mutual bank. We need banks that work for us not against us and for themselves.
117

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 07/10/2008 16:07:39
#126 duncan

"An unplanned, emergency move to prevent large scale failures in the banking system"

The above is what we are talking about. I can assure you that many countries have been facing "large scale failures in the banking system" [your words].

Are you seriously telling me that no other countries have been facing large scale failures in the banking system? I would suggest that they all have.
118

Fairfax,

07/10/2008 16:08:40
connaughtboy (120): "Your definition above is exactly what many Governments in Europe and the US have been doing over the last few weeks. Including the one at Westminster. "Desperation" or "managing a global emergency"."

This is semantics. However, to take you at your word, would you then describe Iceland's actions as desperation or managing a global emergency?
119

Alan B,

07/10/2008 16:17:13
Was interesting that the German ambassator yesterday on newsnight blamed the whole economic crisis on the the UK and US irresponsible economic policies.
120

David MacVicar,

web 07/10/2008 16:18:03
Rufus T. Firefly

That really merits a long answer but it is not the banks or RBS that assists the jobs, the sector, the economy and savings here, it is the State.

Scotland could for example have legislation based on Monopolies or anti trust to stop Lloyds taking over HBOS.
Scotland could also decide to waiver that, just as GB has decided.

My argument is that GB is certainly not doing that based on what is best for Scotland, our jobs or our financial sector because British PMs never have and never will look out for Scottish interests in any UK context. Simple enough?

Scotland needs to get busy being a region or get busy being a State because the current situation of pretendy country and obfuscated Scottish parliament finance and accountability is a Unionist created disaster. Nationalists want the latter (Statehood) and most unionists don't have the cajonies for the latter, the in-between compromise ain't working.
121

Alan B,

07/10/2008 16:19:48
Are the Iceland problems not based on the fact that it bought so much sub prime US mortgage debt?

With globalisation the US lenders off loaded the risk of much of its dodgy mortgages by selling it to other financial institutions round the world. Iceland stupidly bought up much of that debt.
122

David MacVicar,

web 07/10/2008 16:21:27
P.S. Demoting Scotland or England to a region has not worked in 300 years despite the best efforts of many British nationalists so its a complete non starter.
123

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 07/10/2008 16:23:03
#131 Fairfax. Not semantics at all. duncan volunteered a definition of "desperation". Clearly it was wrong.

Iceland? Probably desperate.

One for you. Was the Northern rock nationalisation a desperate act?
124

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 07/10/2008 16:23:42
Or is this desperation:

"Gordon Brown is to meet Bank of England Governor Mervyn King at 1700 BST to discuss plans to stabilise the banking system, Downing Street says.

Chancellor Alistair Darling and the chairman of the Financial Services Authority, Lord Turner, will also take part in the talks.

Downing Street denied that it was an "emergency meeting".

A spokesman said any government announcements would be made in a "calm and orderly way"."
125

Alan B,

07/10/2008 16:27:42
Do not know why anyone is worrying. Now that Mandelson is back calm will resume. lol
126

PJ Walker,

East Lothian 07/10/2008 16:29:03
I predicted, here, that RBS could well collapse 3 weeks ago, to much abuse, I recall....!

Goodwinn must hang for his incompetence and suicidal plays with sareholders' money. Blindly buying ABN Amro with £12 billion of the bank's own money for the highest price imagineable.
RBS have a private jet which is hangered in Paris and costs £ thousands each time it flies empty across the channel to the UK.Recently they have They put up clients at Archerfield House, paying all expenses on 'feel good' golfing days
Goodwin is a muppet and I hope he goes quickly without a bean
127

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 16:30:32
#133 "British PMs never have and never will look out for Scottish interests in any UK context". I think you go to the heart of one of the touchstone nationalist issues here.

By definition, no-one who is charged with the UK's interests is going to put Scotland's interests above those of Wales, Northern Ireland or England.

This boils down to "there should be independence because there should be independence".
128

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 16:32:03
#136 After failing to prove something, you decide to declare it true. How very... SNP.
129

David MacVicar,

web 07/10/2008 16:37:26
Alan B, yes and the other week they were blaming the US and UK for poor Financial governance until they noticed that German institutions were also collapsing like dominoes though the exact same behaviours.

Sarkozy has also been stating the same but the French banks have not, until now, been so impacted because they were too late getting onto the US gravy train.

The politicians imo have been duped by the financiers endeavours to cover their tracks and miss state how deep they were over committed. Its not so easy for the PM and former 'prudent' chancellor to openly state what a funk up we are in due to how duped he has been.

There is now no alternative other than bail outs and the public will take the hit.

Who are the people ultimately responsible and when are they going to be held accountable?
130

Alan B,

07/10/2008 16:41:52
#140 Duncan in Edinburgh

The problem is uk government will put the interest of England above Scotland, Wales and NI.

The sheer size of the population means that if the uk government have to choose between Scotlands interest and Englands interests it will choose England. Because it is 10x the size means that unless Scotlands interests coinside with England scotland is left with in a detrimental position.

The polical nature Britain with its first past the post and very centralised state mean that uk governments which are only really interested in getting elected need to chase middle england and the floating seats.

That is why the tories will write off Scotland and northern England and labour have sold all their values and policies which were at the heart of labour in order to become electable in England.

If the uk was to work it would need massive reform. Neither of the big 2 parties are going to do that. As such Scotland needs to decide between considerably more devolution with fiscal autonomy at its heart or independence.
131

Alan B,

07/10/2008 16:45:16
#David MacVicar

The Germans were blaming the UK and US for its irresponsible house lending. As it that they believe is the root cause of the failure of the banking system and the credit markets.

ie there is nothing wrong with using the credit markets as a source of finance but the market was destroyed by irresponsible anglo saxon housing policies. Germany having debt levels of 60% to the house value compared to 130% according the the German Ambassator.
132

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 16:47:51
#143 "The problem is uk government will put the interest of England above Scotland, Wales and NI."

Well that's precisely the fallacy that is being promoted, but it remains a fallacy. It's based on the false premise that in making decisions the UK government has to choose one of the UK nations to focus on. It doesn't have to, and it generally doesn't.

I agree that the electoral system is in need of reform. Which party has done more than any other for a century to implement such reform? The very people you deride on a daily basis.

PR in Westminster elections is the end-game for Labour. A coalition with the Lib Dems may yet bring it in. It was never even on the slate for the SNP.
133

Hamish Scott,

07/10/2008 16:48:54
#140
Duncan - Scotland makes up 8.5% of the UK. England makes up 85%. The economy is run from London/SE of England which has a third of the population of the UK and the City of London. London/SE of England is where the government is, the senior civil service and just about every person and organisation that 'counts'. Succesive UK governments have seen London/SE of England, in particular the City of London and its needs, as the first priority. These are facts - the facts of unionist life. That's why I'm not an unionist.
134

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 16:50:22
#144 If you blame housing loans for the collapse then you can only rationally blame the US market, because the UK market was not exposed to anything like the same level of risk.

Personally I think the issue is much wider than housing loans, and that was just the catalyst.

Again, it suits you to implicate Brown in the heart of it so you do. You are nothing if not predictable.
135

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 16:51:36
#146 Did you campaign for regional assemblies in the North East and North West?

If not, what you are is a hypocrite.
136

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 16:53:30
147 Duncan#

Come off it Duncan. Brown knew that reliance of the UK banking sector on cheap money meant growth based on credit.

He also knew that if the US went t**s up then the UK would follow..you thing he did not know this?

He gambled and he has been proven to have gambled wrong..you can't be so naive?
137

Hamish Scott,

07/10/2008 16:57:29
#148
Duncan

I don't understand your logic on that one.
138

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 16:58:52
#149 I am not so naive as to suggest that the big bad bogeyman solution works in this case. The problem is structural, long term and the failure of many more than one individual.
139

Huntly loon,

Aberdeenshire 07/10/2008 16:59:48
I found the 'Royal Bank Oil & Gas Index' on a RBS website. What it calculates is beyond my understanding, but it seems to cover production and price of barrels. I believe it was devised by Alex Salmond when he was an economist with the bank and continues to be used in the industry. Having seen the index I would not question the First Minister's competence in dealing with complex financial and economic matters. I am sure every other politician will have his statistics and analyses devised by civil servants and academics. Salmond appears to have been instrumental in devising this index personally. I think this puts Salmond in a slightly different league from Brown and Darling.
140

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 17:00:18
#150 Your argument is that the UK's governance is skewed unfairly towards London and the south east. If that is what you think, then you must support devolution to the English regions - another Labour policy incidentally.
141

,

07/10/2008 17:00:21
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
142

David MacVicar,

web 07/10/2008 17:00:50
Duncan in Edinburgh,

Not quite. The reality is that the clear British interest is focused on the success of the South.

If you live in and want success in the North then the only way to get it is a strategy focused in the success of the North. Independence, is a strategy that is unfortunately not open to those in the North of England.

Secondly independence is not only an economic argument, though it is an important one.

However, the argument goes that centralisation in the South creates wealth that is then shared out and we do better overall because of this. My opinion is that this is a pile of dung. It is a pile of dung because Scotland is financed through paying into the UK and we then get a grant based on an arbitrary calculation.

It is so much more open, honest and accountable that Scotland is Fiscally separate and pays into the UK for reserved areas in an equitable union. Much like how the EU works, each state knows what they are paying into.

The fact that we do not do it this way but use an insanely illogical and obfuscated way instead can only be because some people want it like that as they have something to hide.
143

Border Scot,

07/10/2008 17:03:41
England's interests are Scotland's interests, and vice versa. Scotland exports more to England than to anywhere else in the world by a country mile. Do you honestly think it would be good for Scotland if England went into deep recession? The fact of life is that whether Scotland is independent or not England will remain by far our single biggest export market. The financial services industry in Scotland is based on English clients. To see the two countries as separate flies in the face of all economic sense
144

Fairfax,

07/10/2008 17:04:52
connaughtboy (124): "You know as well as I do that duncan was trying to imply the Irish Government made a desperate move unlike the perfectly normal actions of our Government with respect to Northern Rock and Bradford and Bingley."

That wasn't clear to me, but there is a marked difference in the level of desperation here: NR and B&B were two banks of limited systemic significance, whilst Ireland was facing possible financial collapse.
145

Hamish Scott,

07/10/2008 17:05:01
#153
No amount of regional devolution is going to change the essence of what I said,which is why I am not a pro-devolution unionist but pro-independence. Regional devolution will never deliver the macro-economic powers of the government of an independent state and regional devolution can't change the demographic realities of the UK.
146

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 17:05:38
#152 You're right, Salmond is an economist. However, it is not the job of a First Minister, nor a Prime Minister, nor a Chancellor, to work out economic models or design indices to measure economic outputs. These people should be judged on their ability to lead the efforts on such things, not to do them.
147

Hamish Scott,

07/10/2008 17:06:28
#156
Can you give us the figures fo that?
148

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 17:06:53
#155 "Independence, is a strategy that is unfortunately not open to those in the North of England."

And why is that?
149

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 17:11:28
#158 Then you must support independence for the English regions too, no?
150

Fairfax,

07/10/2008 17:11:56
Connaughtboy (136): "Iceland? Probably desperate.

One for you. Was the Northern rock nationalisation a desperate act?"

If they had nationalized, or part-nationalized, NR within a week of its September problems, then I would have classified it as a desperate act. However, it's hard to say given that our government took 6 months to get around to nationalizing it! I'm unsure whether it is possible for dithering inaction to be classified as desperate.
151

Hamish Scott,

07/10/2008 17:14:22
#162

I support self-determination and oppose people avoiding the essence of the argument.
152

David MacVicar,

web 07/10/2008 17:15:24
153 Duncan in Edinburgh,
I can't speak for Hamish but obviously most people who want independence do not want regionalism in any shape or form. English regions can support what they want vis a vis London centralism. Scottish and English devolution as regionalism is not something many nationalists support so is hardly hypocritical. Your LIB DEM colours are showing ;) Your argument is as Lib Dem logical as EU referendum = Good, Scottish referendum = Bad, or depends on what day you ask!
153

Border Scot,

07/10/2008 17:17:26
#160. Here you go:

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/07/18083820/8

See the chart at the bottom of the page.Admittedly, it is a comparison between Scottish exports to the rest of the Uk and the rest of the world, but I think we can all accept that rest of the UK is made up very largely of England.

Anyway, the bottom line is that we export vastly more t the rest of the UK than we do to the whole of the rest of the world. And that business and financial services are our biggest export to the rest of the UK
154

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 17:20:03
164 Hamish#

Presumably you did not read that two Labour party members have actually contacted a solicitor to initiate an action in order to prevent the Scottish Parliament debating independence!
155

David MacVicar,

WEB 07/10/2008 17:26:22
161 Duncan in Edinburgh.

Don't know why you need to even ask such a question. Scotland is in a Union with England through treaty that can be undone and or renegotiated without too many hurdles and remains a separate legal entity. A region of England even if most people wanted would OBVIOUSLY find it difficult to achieve the same result.


159 Duncan in Edinburgh?
Well done, you have just 'outed' Gordon Brown.
156

Hamish Scott,

07/10/2008 17:26:52
#166
Thanks for the link, though it didn't provide the answers - in part due, as it says itself -

"In general, identifying the value of exports from Scotland to any other country is difficult due to many technical and definitional issues...More specifically, identifying intra- UK trade flows suffers from these difficulties but to a higher degree. Large companies operating across the whole of the UK are typically not structured in a way which allows them to identify Scottish activity separately."

157

David MacVicar,

web 07/10/2008 17:31:19
Border Scot, you are right and of course England is a key export market. Why should that change overall?

However: "to see the two countries as separate flies in the face of all economic sense"

Don't you see that that statement is an oxymoron? We are either two countries or we are not. If you are saying we that are not then good luck with that.
158

Hamish Scott,

07/10/2008 17:32:14
#170

How can we have suitable economic policy for Scotland if we don't even have the necessary statistics. It's obviously notimportant enough to Westminster/Whitehall (although, to be fair, they've only had 300 years) but I suspect an Independent Scottish Government would like to know who we're trading with and how much.
159

Hamish Scott,

07/10/2008 17:37:11
#156
Border Scot - If I can paraphrase:

The UK's interests are the EU's interests, and vice versa. The UK exports more to the EU than to anywhere else in the world by a country mile. Do you honestly think it would be good for the UK if the EU went into deep recession? The fact of life is that whether the UK is independent or not the EU will remain by far our single biggest export market. Industry in the UK is based on EU clients. To see the two unions as separate flies in the face of all economic sense"
160

David MacVicar,

web 07/10/2008 17:37:34
At least AM2 argued that we are all one British entity and any English / Scottish notion is a legacy to be abandoned.
He does not have much support for that position in Scotland but at least it is consistent with the obvious conclusion of UK unionism.
161

Hamish Scott,

07/10/2008 17:39:08
#173

The logic being an EU state with us all in the eurozone. My thanks to the British unionists who have shown, and are showing, the way and free from narrow British nationalism at that.
162

Border Scot,

07/10/2008 17:41:34
#173 -I am completely opposed to the UK withdrawing from the EU.

I think we both undersand that any reasonable person would conclude from the figurs the Scottish government provides that Scotland exports far more to England than to any other part of the world. Though, of course, I can see why nationalists would find this difficult to accpt.
163

Hamish Scott,

07/10/2008 17:41:38
#168

"Desperate times need desperate measures. Nationalise the lot and be done with it."

Fortunately we have a desperate PM. And he is nationalising the lot, just a bit slowly so the taxpayer doesn't twig Labour are bailing out capitalism's fat cats.
164

Hamish Scott,

07/10/2008 17:42:32
#176
Border - Are you in favour of the UK joining the eurozone?
165

David MacVicar,

web 07/10/2008 17:49:12
As a last comment from me today, it is evident that the unionists have a lot of work to do in Scotland. After 300 years Scots want less UK integration not more. Its why most wanted a Scottish parliament and why most want additional powers.

The Union project has failed to assimilate the English and Scottish nations and especially failed to convince the majority in Scotland.

The current status is further independence by slow creep. When you have some Scottish unionist politicians trying to block a democratic referendum though any legal loophole they can find then you know how desperate they really are and that the game is almost over.
166

Border Scot,

07/10/2008 17:56:40
#176 - No, I am not. And you willsee that my original post is not an argument for the union either. Although I am a unionist.
167

danielrober,

07/10/2008 18:21:13
# 152 Huntly loon,Aberdeenshire

Look I'm not bullying Alec.S, but those indexes are just stats with stomachs. Series of interlinking points with bulges (stomachs) of information. This is hard work, work paid for that can be commissioned from many people in Scotland/UK. Very useful but hardly worth basing a national economy on. These results need to be taken in context by constant supervision.

Sorry but companies basing policy on mechanics is like generals using published plans of battle. So i should think that the RBS has gone quite a little past Alec.S stats. After all would you by a ship based on a power point presentation.

Alec.S needs to calm down and start been a team member, please. Rather than a captain who hogs the ball.
168

gasman,

cheshire 07/10/2008 18:32:35
Congratulations to Duncan in Edinburgh for talking so much sense about the benefits of the Union.
169

Alan B,

07/10/2008 18:45:54
#147 Duncan in Edinburgh,

If you re-read my post you will see i was posting that it was the German government representative that was blaming the US and UK for the crisis. The US predominately for creating the crisis and the uk for adopting the same "irresponsible" policies.

Lets face it was all know this crisis is a global one becuase of the US that is why the banking system is failing. The UK is not big enough to cause a global meltdown.

However we have followed the same irresponsible lending to the housing market that underpins this crisis. Brown has been irresponsible in his economic management. Not controlling house prices, allowing the massive consumer debt which has resulted from massive house price inflation, poor regulation of the financial markets, and running up big deficits in the relatively good times.

The fact that Brown has been incompetent is not an argument for independence and I do not try to confuse the 2 issues. But it does you defence of the union no good to defend Brown and labours incompetence as it shows your judgement to be impaired.

Finally have you heard the scathing remarks about Brown and Darling from George Matheson. He had been on the tv saying they are dithering and incompetent. And he has been backed up by the chambers of commerce.
170

Alan B,

07/10/2008 18:55:32
#Border Scot

"England's interests are Scotland's interests, and vice versa."

That is economically and politically illiterate. Sometimes scotland interest may coinside with Englands many times they do not. Just as the north of englands interests do not coinside with the south much of the time.

It is noticably you could not justify your remark in any way.

Take a few examples.

Monetary policy. The fact that the north of britain grows more slowly than the south shows that interest needs are different in the north to the south. As such Scotland clearly has different needs.

Following on from that it would be in scotlands economic interests to join the euro but it would be difficult for the south of england. This is becuase scotland monetary needs are more in line with the euro.

In political terms we saw an example where the tories opted out the social chapter. England did not want it, Scotland did. What happened. The uk opted out using up a lot of political capital and alienating itself.

171

Alan B,

07/10/2008 18:58:57
Interesting that George Matheson is now calling for all deposits to be guaranteed and has slated Brown for dithering.
172

Rufus T. Firefly,

07/10/2008 19:09:16
#185 Its not that interesting Alan.

Mr Matheson is a well known SNP/Independence man who wont miss any opportunity to stick the knife into the UK Government.
173

,

07/10/2008 19:10:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
174

Rufus T. Firefly,

07/10/2008 19:11:01
#184 Alan, just like being in the EU then?
175

Rufus T. Firefly,

07/10/2008 19:14:32
I wonder if Salmond will be on Newsnight again tonight laughing at the financial crisis.

He found it so funny last night.

Well if RBS goes under (Scotlands biggest employer), then we can switch off the lights.
176

Rufus T. Firefly,

07/10/2008 19:18:14
Here you can check it out for yourself.

Salmond killing himself laughing at the current economic crisis on Newsnight Scotland last night.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00dw3fk/

What a great First Minister.
177

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 07/10/2008 19:19:32
#141 duncan

The world champion at moving the goal-posts.

What are you on about?
178

,

07/10/2008 19:22:02
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
179

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 07/10/2008 19:23:04
#185 And now Brown and Darling are locked away in No 10, paralysed by indecision.

An emergency meeting, borne out of desperation !
180

P Rayner.,

Great Britain. 07/10/2008 19:30:42
It is a self evident truth that for a number of years the City has been a major wealth generator for the whole country, but that London and the south east of England have been the greater beneficiaries. However, this is unavoidable and is replicated in every single country on earth. Were Scotland ever to become independent wealth would be concentrated mostly in a relatively weak Edinburgh and the benefit to the rest of Scotland would remain illusory. So its seems to me, imperfect though it might be, Scots best interests are served by the Union. Better by far, I would have thought, for robust Scottish voices to be loudly heard, as they hitherto have been, where true power lies, at Westminster.
181

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 07/10/2008 19:33:03
#190 rufus

Troll !!
182

Masterpiece,

07/10/2008 19:33:39
I watched the BBC News at 6pm and the ITV news at 6.30pm from London and they each have the same news items about the financial crises engulfing the Banking System.
Why do we need to have two channels with the same depressing news one after the other. I am sure there will be another 10 or 20 channels with exactly the same coverage spewing out the same repeated news until another story comes along.

What is the point of all this news coverage and is it not a sheer waste of licence fee payers money. When are the BBc going to cut down on this over-kill and allow other programmes and channels to develop?
183

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 07/10/2008 19:35:26
Duncan said:

"Ireland's act was one of desperation, and they have ended up making a guarantee they simply cannot back up, simply because they were left with no other option. To suggest that they are in a better position than the UK is - well, breathtakingly stupid."

Boy are you going to look silly if Brown and Darling decide to follow Ireland's lead !
184

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 07/10/2008 19:36:27
You and Fairfax (same person?)
185

Masterpiece,

07/10/2008 19:36:44
Are all these London orientated news programmes meant to make us feel more British and a nation or what?
186

,

07/10/2008 19:37:47
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
187

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 19:41:26
Looks like Brown and Darling dithering has cost a few billion...perhaps if they had guaranteed savings when Salmon had called for it one weeks worth of heavy losses could have been avoided!

The government will guarantee the savings and yes they will have as usual acted too late!
188

Gran,

Hong Kong 07/10/2008 19:48:31
So much comment on nationalist issues misses the point. RBS and HBOS have gone down the toilet due to many factors, not least bad management and over ambitious ventures for relatively small Scottish banks. There is no commment whatsoever in this medium, or the BBC or indeed other news media about a very successful UK bank, which rides the storm because of its unparalleled internationalism. HSBC. Have a look at its current share price and share performance over the last 3 months, Its an eye opener. And HSBC were asked to take over HBOS but apparently offered nil value.
Its no good being parochial in todays global village. HSBC is truly global and its BRITISH, hip hip hooray
189

PJ07,

07/10/2008 20:07:29
Somebody please kill Duncan before I get to him and break both his legs.
190

jimmyt,

scotland 07/10/2008 20:11:41
#201 Nevsky (Norweigan Ambassador)

I do enjoy reading your blogs. You really don't have a clue do you? In Ireland the government have a blanket guarantee on deposits that the Irish government would have no chance of honouring with no taxpayer upside, only downside risk. Not only that, 'guarantees' can't kick commercial lending. Why can't Ireland invest actual cash on its banks? Because Ireland doesnt have the capital to fund anything dramatic BECAUSE ITS TOO SMALL. In the UK Darling's proposals have downside risk BUT by taking an equity stake the taxpayer has the opportunity of benefiting from upside too when the sector recovers. AND extra capital will kick start lending.

Nevsky, you don't have a clue how balance sheets work and god help us if you are the standard of the decision-making electorate if do-nothing Salmond gets his way and gives us a referendum to end up like Iceland and Ireland
191

Stephen Allinson,

London, England 07/10/2008 20:14:38
The great, nay, the revered, the glorious leader says we've stopped the dirty English spiv short sellers and now our Scottish banks will be saved!!!....What was that?....we stopped those dirty London based short sellers and RBS shares are still down 40% today? well, The great, nay, the revered, the glorious leader says we must preserve the headquarters of the RBS in Scotland when it is taken over and sack all the English for bringing this doom upon our great Scottish institution!
The great, nay, the revered, the glorious leader says sigh, if only my people knew what lengths I go to for them, what sacrifices I make the English pay - there is no gratitude.....
192

An Greumach Mor,

Scotland 07/10/2008 21:00:49
The problem with the banking system is that our banks in UK and EU have purchased large amounts of very high loan to value sub prime assets loaned to people who would not get a cheque book in the UK, the US Investment houses packaged them up in the US and sold to the Traders within the investment banks all over the world.

It has nothing to do with Mrs Smith's credit card nor the personal mortgages of UK population. We are to blame as a population for keeping a failing ecomomy going by raising capital against silly house prices in UK fuelled by financial bonuses in London.

So many people without the slightist clue, I include many political journalists and politicians and some comments above in this.

The clever Traders are making a fortune from this panic because many of them have no real understanding of what they are even trading in. Public school boys given jobs in the city and software programs to perform analysis. The City of London is full of lemmings.
193

An Greumach Mor,

Scotland 07/10/2008 21:05:37
What we need right now is decisive action from the Government. Firm action. Not waiting to see what the papers request. Not waiting to see what happens.

It is timefor that pair of dithering fan-knees Darling and Brown to realise. They are calilng the shots not deflecting the shots.

We need leadership.
194

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 21:07:44
Jimmy 204#

Thanks for taking the trouble to post nonsene and i am very glad to hear that the steps needed all along have been so simple (if only you were an economic advisor to Darling).

You are right, the cash injection needed by Ireland is cash they do not have as is the case with Iceland and so your point is what exactly?

The usual unionist 'small can't survive' garbage i think?

Read some of the articles in the Telegraph tonight and Times and see that this could all be a disaster and also see the mauling Brown and Darling are taking; then come back and try again!
195

An Greumach Mor,

Scotland 07/10/2008 21:12:10
As for the debate above about what side of the union debate we are on or not and whether the people in control can pass some blame onto Salmond for his cery correct comments.

Stand up and be counted. Who was the captain of the ship when it sunk. That is the man who is blamed. The credit crisis is much older than the current scottish government. thats a fact.

But neither is Brown to blame, nor the FSA or the Bank of England. This is the Traders playing pass the parcel with toxic debt. The music stopped and the dung hit the fan.

The record of all of these toxic transactions is available and should be subject to analysis. It would let us all see who caused the current problem.

Heads should be on poles for this.
196

Rufus T. Firefly,

07/10/2008 21:25:17
Ladyboy alert at 208.
197

Gran,

07/10/2008 21:34:05
Question Whats links Gordon Brown, Alistair Darling, HBOS and RBC
Answer., they are all Scottish and all bankrupt
198

Gran,

07/10/2008 21:40:21
and as for post 209, were it not for the Scots and the Welsh we would never have Labour governments in England, there are no tory seats in s and w and never have been ( apart from Flint and some posh part of edinburgh). And so its a problem caused not by the financial spivs but by weak, economically illiterate labour governments. The fact that the Chancellor is an ex Marxist and a Scot, much like his master, goes to the root of the problem.
199

jimmyt,

Scotland 07/10/2008 21:43:10
Nevsky, what a lot of old dross, however do keep posting the blogs, they do make me chuckle. If you had read my comments instead of belching the usual nationalistic diatribe you will have read that I explained the difference between 'guarantees' and 'equity investment'. As a NATION of 60m people we have the capital available to support our banks. The arc of prosperity is a myth Nevsky, SNP rhetoric, exposed by the collapse of Iceland's economy and the impotence of Ireland's policy makers.

But hey, there's still Norway, all isolated outwith the EU. What a joke. Can't wait for Alex 'Chuckles' Salmond's referendum, a chance to put this nonsense to bed for a generation.

200

Hamish Scott,

07/10/2008 21:59:42
#212
Last Westminster General Election 2005

In England:

Labour 286
All other seats in England 242
201

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 22:03:09
jimmyt 213#

Dont see what the joke is, Norway is isolated outwith the EU? Not quite how they see it, they do very well from being 'isolated', one of the richest countries in the world i believe?


Leaderless and clueless and with borrowing next year at £600 billion plus the bail out cash and recession,depleted treasury, 350,000 jobs predicted to go,...well doesn't look too good does it?

That's a description of the UK of course and not Norway!
202

WL,

livingston 07/10/2008 22:45:19
The drop in share price of RBS is due to the fact that the shareholders are getting nervous and want to sell their shares; not that the value of the bank has decreased.
203

Fairfax,

07/10/2008 23:23:08
connaughtboy (197): "Duncan said:

"Ireland's act was one of desperation, and they have ended up making a guarantee they simply cannot back up"

Well, that's clearly true.

"Boy are you going to look silly if Brown and Darling decide to follow Ireland's lead !"

I think Britain will follow this lead, at least for private depositors, but Duncan won't look silly (other than for being a unionist) -- all European states will soon be making grandiose promises in the hope of financial stability.
204

Duncan in Edinburgh,

07/10/2008 23:53:52
#203 Your argument is crude, lacks grace, and boils down to nothing more than an empty threat.

Are you Alex Salmond?

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Today's Vote

Should ex-RBS boss Sir Fred Goodwin give up his £650,000 pension?
Yes
No

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.