Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


HBOS takeover: Still time to save 'The Bank'

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: 15 October 2008
THE Scotsman is today demanding answers about the HBOS takeover in a bid to secure the best deal for the nation and prevent the untimely and unnecessary death of one of our most venerable institutions.
The newspaper is adamant that Scotland should not hurtle towards the Lloyds buy-up without scrutinising it meticulously and ensuring it remains necessary in the rapidly changing financial climate.

There is a need for assurances that it is in the best interests of shareholders, customers, employees and the Scottish economy. And The Scotsman believes that the option of maintaining HBOS as an independent bank should not be hastily swept from the table.

The cause is being backed by leading businessman Jim Spowart, who is battling to clarify the terms of the deal. He is calling on the government to rethink its support and to keep the bank independent. And last night, a spokesman for Alex Salmond, the First Minister, said "questions will be asked" and reiterated his hope that HBOS, known colloquially in Scotland as "The Bank", should remain independent.

The takeover, mooted earlier this month, was presented as a done deal on Monday when the UK government said it would take a 17 per cent share in the resultant "superbank".

Westminster has already lifted the usual competition laws to allow the deal to go through. But The Scotsman is concerned that the deal is now seen as having to succeed at any price – particularly as the terms were renegotiated downwards on the day of the bank bail-out announcement.

When the deal was first hammered out, sources said the alternative was for HBOS to go under, but the unprecedented bail-out, announced on Monday, means the absolutes are no more.

Mike Gilson, the editor of The Scotsman, said: "It is right and proper that this newspaper should ask serious questions about the takeover of HBOS by Lloyds TSB. We are extremely concerned about what might be perceived as a drift towards takeover without a pause for some serious questions to be answered."

As Lloyds TSB's share price fell further yesterday, dragging the effective takeover price of HBOS down to 91.5p per share, Mr Spowart was in touch with Lesley Sawers, the head of the Scottish Council for Development and Industry (SCDI), to build a broad front of business support for a thorough rethink of the takeover.

Mr Spowart told The Scotsman last night: "HBOS is certainly manageable on its own – and, indeed, it would be better if it was kept independent and allowed to trade out over the next three years.

"The Lloyds TSB takeover will mean a cull of thousands of jobs, with figures I've heard mentioned of cost savings of up to £3 billion."

A spokesman for the SCDI said it was "willing to engage to get the best possible outcome for Scotland".

He went on: "If the bank rescue package had been announced a few weeks earlier, then this takeover would have been unlikely to go ahead.

"There are a lot of Scottish business people who have had positive help from the Bank of Scotland over the years and, without that local support through tough times, they may not have survived."

Among the senior business figures demanding a rethink is Donald Macdonald of the Macdonald Hotels chain.

He told The Scotsman last night: "There are Scottish businesses which would not be here today had the management of the Bank of Scotland not had an understanding of local problems and local conditions."

On the stock market yesterday, shares generally continued to rally, with the FTSE 100 up 137.3 points, or 3.2 per cent, at 4394.21. But shares in Lloyds TSB fell 10.7p, or 6.6 per cent, to 151.3p, while HBOS fell 4.7p, or 5.2 per cent, to 85.3p. By contrast, Barclays rose 14 per cent to 246p.

Analysts fear the government's rescue bid may have created a two-tier banking system, with HSBC and Barclays in the premier league, and Royal Bank of Scotland, Lloyds TSB and HBOS in the second division.

Mr Gilson said that while it might have been "the only show in town" a couple of weeks ago, the part-nationalisation of RBS meant "the sands are shifting rapidly on this financial story".

He said: "Certainly, we believe it questionable that the current HBOS management team is best placed to fight for the best interests of the Scottish side of the business, given that they are serving a very public and humiliating notice period.

"There are serious questions about the severe lack of choice in the high street for personal and business customers in Scotland if the deal goes ahead.

"We are also unashamed in calling for every effort to be made to preserve the historic function of the Bank of Scotland, headquartered in Edinburgh with an expert staff backed by centuries of tradition in service to both Scottish commerce and the wider community."

He said that while "nobody has the ideal solution", the country "should not sleepwalk into this takeover".

He added: "In the next few days and weeks, we will be putting tough questions to both banks and the government on this deal."

A spokesman for Mr Salmond said: "The First Minister's preference was always that HBOS should remain as an independent bank. Of course, questions will be asked during this period before the decision is ultimately taken by the shareholders."

There were unconfirmed reports yesterday that the Treasury was working on a plan for the outright nationalisation of HBOS were the takeover to fall apart.

But Mr Spowart said: "Total, outright nationalisation would just not fly. Shareholders would legally challenge it. There would be a legal challenge to the government. It is more likely that the government would take a 70 per cent stake until normal conditions resume."

Roger Lawson, from the UK Shareholders Association, said he also believed that the deal should be completely reassessed. He is a shareholder in Lloyds TSB and he questioned the deal at a presentation by the bank yesterday.

He said: "At the start, the deal seemed to make sense, but the new deal means giving away an arm and a leg and independence. There is a lot of concern among Lloyds TSB shareholders.

"A couple of weeks ago, most were generally in favour of the deal, but with the fundraising and the cancellation of dividends for five years, most private shareholders think the whole thing is bonkers."

Bank takeover must be reassessed now

'Everyone is carrying on … the atmosphere's bizarrely positive'

Brown: Banking crisis has proved case for the Union

Inflation soars to 16-year high … but prices set to fall

Beware dark days after the euphoria of bank bail-out

Heard the ones about the economic crisis?


Independence: would it have lessened crisis?

After Gordon Brown's claim that the case for independence has been severely damaged by the global crisis, The Scotsman asks what difference a self-governed Scotland would have made

Would an independent Scotland have been able to bail out RBS and HBOS?

Unionist politicians have claimed an independent Scotland could not have afforded the £37 billion the UK Treasury has found for the banks. That is more than the annual Scottish block grant and would have left Scotland with a huge debt – far greater in percentage terms than the debt the deal will be worth in UK terms.

But the UK government does not have the money either and will borrow it from the world money markets in the form of a gilt auction. An independent Scotland could, arguably, have done the same.

Would RBS and HBOS have got into such trouble had Scotland been independent?

The Nationalists have argued that Scotland would have better financial regulation to prevent banks from being so cavalier with money and mortgages.

Politics professor John Curtice has also suggested that an independent Scotland might have prevented the Bank of Scotland from being merged with the Halifax.

Would an independent Scotland have been able to cope with the banking crisis in general?

Alex Salmond was adamant last week that an independent Scotland would have acted as decisively as the Irish government, which moved to guarantee all deposits in its banks while other European countries, including the UK, were deciding how far to go.

That restored confidence in the Irish banks and an independent Scotland would have had that same flexibility. What it would not have had was the economic clout that comes from being part of the world's fourth-biggest economy. This week Gordon Brown persuaded other European countries to follow the British lead, something no leader of a small independent country could have done.

Is there an "arc of prosperity" any longer or is it the "arc of insolvency"?

The "arc of prosperity" was supposed to include Norway, Iceland and Ireland.

Iceland has suffered the most dramatic fall. Norway is in a better position and is expecting its economy to grow by a reduced amount for the next couple of years. Ireland is already in recession but, as Irish economic expert Marc Coleman has pointed out, it was coming from such a position of strength it is well ahead of the UK in economic terms, even though it has sunk into a recession.

"After 15 years of record-busting growth, some froth is being blown off the Guinness. But the glass remains very much almost full," he said.

The "arc of prosperity" no longer exists, but neither is it the "arc of insolvency" of Labour claims.

Had an independent Scotland been in the eurozone, would it have made a difference?

The SNP has always predicted that an independent Scotland would be in the eurozone. The euro has sunk against sterling, which is not good news for Irish importers or the all-round Irish economy.

However, being in the eurozone has cushioned the Irish economy from the worst effects of the credit crunch. Iceland has seen its currency plummet because it does not have the resilience that comes with having 400 million users across a continent.

Will the looming recession persuade Alex Salmond to put off the 2010 independence referendum?

There is an argument to suggest the Scottish Government would not be able to bring forward a referendum on independence in the midst of a recession, simply because it would not seem right.

But the First Minister is determined to bring forward the referendum bill because it is his party's flagship piece of legislation. It may not get through the parliament, but there is little doubt Mr Salmond is absolutely committed to it.

Page 1 of 1

 
1

EPS,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 00:06:07
This article is an excellent analysis.
2

peteedinburgh,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 00:15:11
Isn't hindsight marvellous. Of course an Independent Scotland would have bought in stricter financial regulation. I can't quite recall where it was in anyone's Holyrood manifesto or other posturings but I'm sure it was there.

I wonder if the banks would have stayed in Scotland though or would they have shifted to a more favourable regulatory climate in London.


NB the word favourable is context sensitive here. Its that hindsight again.
3

peteedinburgh,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 00:19:44
PS

I might add that my financial advisor on an abortive business proposal early this year let slip that HBOS were first to stop lending to new businesses. No problem with e BTL mortgage in 2006 though. What was that comment again - ah yes here it is "had the management of the Bank of Scotland not had an understanding of local problems and local conditions"

ha!

4

Daibhidh,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 00:22:53
"I wonder if the banks would have stayed in Scotland though or would they have shifted to a more favourable regulatory climate in London."

I think you'll find that an independent Scotland would be a far more appealling location for the financial sector than London given we would be able to remodel our economy and fiscal structures to favour sensible banking organisations more easily than the rest of the UK...it's easier to remodel a smaller economy than a large, creeking juganaught like the debt-ridden UK economy...
5

,

15/10/2008 00:24:36
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
6

Nevsky,

Moscow 15/10/2008 00:28:09
Good grief, wonders will never cease. The Scotsman printing a balanced article for once with both sides of the argument represented..and there was me about to give up!

Jamieson and Mackintosh for editorship i say!
7

Nevsky,

Moscow 15/10/2008 00:28:49
7#

And the actress to the Bishop!
8

Nevsky,

Moscow 15/10/2008 00:30:08
9 Trams#

Nice to see the heavyweights like Marx and Engels coming in with their in-depth contributions!
9

Nevsky,

Moscow 15/10/2008 00:35:46
12 Prams#

horosho, ne vashna!
10

Nevsky,

Moscow 15/10/2008 00:38:56
12 prams:

Russian for 'fine, nae bother'!
11

Nevsky,

Moscow 15/10/2008 00:45:46
15 Prams:

Tbi govoro po rooski? Maladyets Schotlandets!
12

Nevsky,

Moscow 15/10/2008 00:48:41
16 Prams#

So they say on the Tverskaya!

Night...or 'spakoye noche' as they 'govorit' down my way!
13

Daibhidh,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 00:49:58
I see the unionists are again rejoicing in Scottish problems...
14

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 00:53:46
Unfortunately, 'the-bubble-has-burst', HBOS like the RBOS, got the 'raw-deal', some may say they deserved, what has, 'come-to-pass'.

One thing for sure, the Government bail out, has repartition's, that no-one will ever change now.

The "Deal for Shareholders" @85pence on close yesterday, says mountains, if you invested in HBOS, you have made a loss, small or large, you will never redeem your investment now, or ever!

Scotland as usual, lost any battle, due to our weaknesses, in Politics, more the interest in banning the under 21year olds from purchasing booze, while our economic wealth's collapses, in front of them all!

Well Done Indeed!,....

More the importance of the, ..'booze culture' than HBOS or RBS!

UTTER SHAME, on the Scottish Parliament!!!
15

Richardinho,

15/10/2008 00:55:05
It's impossible to say how things would have been different had Scotland been independent. In this hypothetical situation, at what year did Scotland become independent-last year? 1979? 1314? There are too many variables to make an accurate answer. Yet if Labour want to make this argument, then supporters of independence have every right to give reasons why in fact this crisis could have been prevented from happening in the first place, rather than Gordon Brown creating it with his profligate policies and then playing the hero riding to the rescue.
16

Jock MacSprog,

15/10/2008 00:57:49
what a strange article. What a lot of populist pap. Corporations dont have nationalities. They arent "institutions" they are companies. They are owned by the shareholders, not the citizens of the region they have their headquarters in. All this nonsense about HBOS and RBOS being "scottish" is utter pap. Their employees are from all nations as are their customers and shareholders. This idea that the local governments or local legislatures can decide whether they merger or are acquired is utter fantasy. This entire line of thought and the recent stories surrounding it is just the mutterings of people trying to wind up the sentimental locals and nationalist whackos who long for the byegone era of gentlemanly banking by wise sensible Scots. Guess what, it never existed. This idea of Scots canniness and being so good with money was and is a MYTH. Get over it.
17

Richardinho,

15/10/2008 01:00:05
'This idea that the local governments or local legislatures can decide whether they merger or are acquired is utter fantasy.'

Well actually they can. Governments can act to prevent monopolies being created.
18

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 01:06:29

Jock ~24,

Agree! but this is the consequences of what happens re my post #22,...

While we Play with,...'Play-dough', as in alcohol related subjects, the World around us, eats our cakes, and 'Steals the Beds we lie in!
19

Richardinho,

15/10/2008 01:10:42
It's a pity all these economic geniuses like #26, who seem to be able to know exactly what would have happened in a hypothetical independent Scotland, were not able to predict this actual crisis happening in the first place.
20

Jock MacSprog,

15/10/2008 01:11:32
25 true Richardinho, but not for silly populist nationalist reasons or because a newspaper "demands" answers.
21

Nevsky,

Moscow 15/10/2008 01:12:04
24 Jock:

I think that you will find even a cursory glance to Iceland will tell you where they are owned and who they are accountable to!

Perhaps, bearing in mind you line of thought, the shareholders should then be asked to bail companies out as they seemed to be owned by no-one else?

Why then in that case has each government assumed resposibility for their banks and pumped billions in to secure their future?

Banking is more than shareholders is the answer, they are profit, profit and profit as well as jobs, infrastrucure, subsidiary industries and tax for their respective countries!

Scotland has no central bank and the last remaining Scottish institutions at best will be 36% English owned and 4% Scottish owned; there is no other country in the world in such a situation!

Learn the real facts!
22

Richardinho,

15/10/2008 01:15:21
#29 "true Richardinho, but not for silly populist nationalist reasons or because a newspaper "demands" answers."

Actually, the can do it for whatever reason they like.
23

Nevsky,

Moscow 15/10/2008 01:17:54
26 Richard#

Again, yet another unionist who applies the current situation of Scottish Banks who have operated in a UK framework and equates the situation as being exactly the same in an indepenent Scotland!

Wrong!

You would be as well saying that Norway could not afford the level of bailout that the UK has provided; weak, illogical, ill-informed and purile argument to say the least!

24

Jock MacSprog,

15/10/2008 01:20:35
31, No, they cant. AntiTrust and Anticompetiton laws are very specific and not vague. In your socialist dream world the government controls the private sector. IN the real world, it only occurs in very very rare instances such as the RBOS HBOS situation. You have obviously been listening to too many Alex Salmond speeches.
25

Richardinho,

15/10/2008 01:26:28
#31 "No, they cant. AntiTrust and Anticompetiton laws are very specific and not vague"

Sure, unlike your reference to 'populist nationalist reasons or because a newspaper "demands" answers.'-that's not vague at all!

'In your socialist dream world the government controls the private sector.'

What do you think the governments of the USA, the UK and the rest of the world have just spent trillions doing?
26

Royster,

15/10/2008 01:37:52
#32. Norway would only just squeak a bailout as it would have to sell down its fund at fire sale prices. It would then have lost all its investment. Scottish Independence is dead.
27

Richardinho,

15/10/2008 01:50:17
#35 'Scottish Independence is dead.'
So what you're saying is that no small country can exist?
28

Nevsky,

Moscow 15/10/2008 01:55:15
35 Royster#

But has it Royster? Norway has offered government gilts which does not even tap into the countries reserves so what is you point?

The UK has had to BORROW money on foreign markets on commercial loan terms as the UK does not have the cash; this is a bail out on CREDIT!

Norway has not, neither has Ireland nor Denmark borrowed one bean to shore up their banking sector!

The UK has nationalised completely two, part-nationalised three and god knows what awaits as a consequence!

You and you ideas are a joke!
29

Sean K,

Elgin 15/10/2008 02:05:10
Sincere thanks to the Scotsman and Jaimeson / McIntosh for finally taking a welcome pro-Scottish stance on this issue of fundamental importance to the nation.

Very much appreciated !
30

You can stick your independence up your a***!!,

15/10/2008 02:09:49
The BoS is about as Scottish a Mike Myer's accent in Austin Powers.

It was lost to Scotland a long, long time ago.
31

You can stick your independence up your a***!!,

15/10/2008 02:11:55
#35 Correct about the Norwegian Oil Fund assets - down $34 billion since June - and still falling.

They invested a lot in US blue chip stocks - bad move truth be told.
32

Bring it Off,

UK 15/10/2008 02:16:13
ENGLISH BANK GIVEN ALL THE TIME IT WANTS - HOW STRANGE

BARCLAYS IS LEFT ALONE BY THE GORDON BROWN COMMUNIST REGIME - WHY?

More surprising is that regulators are giving the bank until next year to secure an additional £5bn, with a planned £3bn rights issue by March and a £2bn dividend cut by April.

IS IT BECAUSE THEY ARE ENGLISH YOU CANNOT TELL ME THAT BARCLAYS ARE SITTING ON BILLIONS OF LOSSES THROUGH THEIR GLOBAL TRADES AND EXOTIC CREDIT PRODUCTS.

BUT THE GOVERNMENT ALLOW THEM ALL THE TIME THEY WANT MEANWHILE THE MARKET PICKS UP AND BARCLAYS SMELLS SWEET - HOW COME

33

You can stick your independence up your a***!!,

15/10/2008 02:23:38
#41 No conspiracy - Barclays think they can raise the additional capital because their share price hasn't gone down like a stone - if they fail then they too will have to rely on the bailout.
34

Royster,

15/10/2008 02:27:37
#37. The point is it's all they have got. If they are borrowing against that fund and the fund goes down then they will have a much bigger problem. They do not have a large varied economy with a broad tax base like the UK. Scotland would have been flattened by the crisis if it weren't for the UK. Most Scots - at least the ones not on magic mushrooms - realise this.
35

Richardinho,

15/10/2008 02:31:02
This crisis that was created under the union and don't you forget it.
36

Nevsky,

Moscow 15/10/2008 02:38:07
43 Royster#

Once again you post like an imbecile. The whole affair was created within the UK..UNDERSTAND? You hve to understand this basic point!

It was not created in an indepenedent Scotland, an independent Scotland is not responsible!

You are taking the present situation which was created in the UK and stating that this would be exactlty the same situation if Scotland was independent.

Not only that, you are then stating that Scotland would behave in exactly the sme way the UK government has!

You understand how this is NOT that case and that your hypothetical reality is exactly that?

Let me pose another scenario. Just like Ireland, Scotland guaranteed it's banking deposuts and then Europe gave full backing and stated the 'no institution would fail'

This would not have cost the Scottish taxpayer one penny and secured the whole banking sector..UNDERSTAND!!!!!
37

democracy,

Scottish Borders 15/10/2008 02:45:36
#26 Richard 1, says "It is about time the SNP come into the real world,you could have been another Iceland!"

It is yourself who needs an injection of reality,to compare Iceland with Scotland is like comparing UK to the whole of the European Union, then some!

The EU is 8 times the size of UK, but Scotland is 20 times the size of Iceland and add to that, the fact that Edinburgh is one of the major financial players in Europe.

Now, I know Unionists do not like to hear those realities but you will just have to start living in the real world!!!
38

Royster,

15/10/2008 02:58:41
#46. Democracy. Do you read the news? Edinburgh is not a major financial player. It was a minor financial player until a few weeks ago.
39

democracy,

Scottish Borders 15/10/2008 03:20:11
#47 Royster, A Unionist dreamer,start living with reality and you will improve your life!!

That is why Westminster will kill to stop Scotland becoming independent because of the loss of revenue from Scotland from the financial,service,whisky,public,private sectors,oh, and oil as well,nearly forgot,and for a UK debt-ridden Government to be without that revenue coming in would weaken it considerably.

Now,those same revenues driving the economy of a smaller country of 5M population would do nicely thank you very much, and goodnight!!
40

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 15/10/2008 03:52:07
A balanced article from the Scotsman? What a very pleasant surprise. One minor criticism though. "What it would not have had was the economic clout that comes from being part of the world's fourth-biggest economy." Why do keep saying the UK economy is the 4th biggest?

According to the World Bank, The OECD and the CIA Factbook, the UK economy is 5th largest by GDP and 8th Largest by GDP PPP.

Other than that this is the First balanced article regarding the economics of an independant Scotland I have ever seen in the Scotsman. Maybe the Johnstones have some share in HBOS or Lloyds? It is funny how having a financial stake in something can trump partisan political spinning.

41

Jeeemy,

St Andrews 15/10/2008 04:15:22
Oh! Come on you lot, Maggie Thatcher required the Falklands debacle, Teflon Tony required the WMD’s, what was left for our great history graduate?

You collect the big prize on the stall, you have the answer? When the sub-prime fiasco hit the fan in the good ol US of A; the Great, the Magnificent, Gordon started to spin with “Mandie’s” help, to create a run on the institutions that he let run wild during his tenure in office as Chancellor.
He allowed the FSA to become a weak and miserable watch dog, not bothering to kick out the woefully inadequate members of staff in there. Have you noticed that he replaced the head of that organisation after the proverbial hit the fan?

So as a result of the Great Gordon’s actions what do we have to show for them? Mandy is in the House of Lords and picks up over a million, the FSA has been kicked up the proverbial, and the Bank’s that Gordon spun into the ground are bailed out at great expence with what being used as collateral?
Black Gold.
42

Blarney,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 04:18:21
Noticed certain unionists are now not mentioning Norway in it's "arc of insolvency", too easy a lie to dissprove.
Norway has a population of 4.9 million, similar natural resourses to us, less oil than us.
Here are some of the shocking figures from Norway this week after the battering it has taken from this world economic collapse.
Unemployment at 2%.
Inflation at 3.1% highest since 1988, up from 2.8% in Sept.
GDP up 0.6% every quarter this year.
Oil fund at $ 400 billion, forecast to $600 billion by 2011
sadly though the fund has only increased 2.4% in the last quarter due to global financial problems and is it's worst growth ever.
Main interest rate at 5.75%, possible cut coming.
Construction rate is up.
Manufacturing remains strong
Services only up slightly
Government to increase public spending over the next 12 months, areas to be targeted using it's oil wealth are health, education, research and environmental projects.
Yep they are pretty well buggered, I wouldn't be surprised if they go bankrupt very soon with the state it's in.
So, will someone please tell Norway they are broke and should get quickly back into a Union with Sweden, who incidentally is very small and is also great, thank you very much.
Brown = Lying bufoon who presided over our economy for 12 years and got us in this mess,
Brown = Horses rear end who thinks everything is fine and we don't mind that he has plunged us all into even more debt, over 16,000 each, what a clever chap he is, round of applause for that man, glad to see him genuinly smile for a change he deserves all our thanks.
43

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 15/10/2008 04:23:41
#40 A***!!

"They invested a lot in US blue chip stocks - bad move truth be told."

Could have been worse, they could have invested in UK Blue Chips like the Banks.
44

,

15/10/2008 05:05:57
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
45

Kingston,

Singapore 15/10/2008 05:26:38
It was the same newspaper that has been hyping the property market for years.

HBOS and RBS don't deserve the status of banks. They acted like scan artists and now they have been caught out.

The Scotsman is as much to blame for this mess as anyone.

46

donald,

glasgow 15/10/2008 05:42:12
Save BoS and ditch Halifax.
47

Royster,

15/10/2008 05:57:32
This whole financial crisis has just shown what a wind-bag Alex Salmond is and how the SNP's economic policies were all based on a wing and a prayer.
48

Dennis Belford,

Johannesburg 15/10/2008 06:12:42
I was once schooled by the then chief executive of The Bank of Scotland(I was running a bank overseas) he said " never have an exposure to property of more than 2.5% of the banks net worth!" and "beware the big deal" It is unlikely that the HBOS merger would have seen light of day under his stewardship.
The current crisis (driven by shareholder value concerns or in simple language greed)Would not have been possible if banks adhered to prudent banking principles (well understood especially in Scotland)
and (Dare I say it adherence to the gold standard!)
The Halifax was/is a building society and their objectives should have remained the same to provide low cost access to financing to households for private property.
The Bank of Scotland is Scotlands National Bank (was the central bank)and as such guardian of the nation's
money (Finances)- Some Guardian! What calibre of executive now controls the vaults from The Mound?
Why is no body asking - the Question - and while you are at it What kind of Salaries do these executives command - compared to the time when The Bank was managed by competent Scottish Bankers!
49

Angleland Isover,

15/10/2008 06:56:30
Team gb may think this hinders Scotlands future when in fact they may have made the future more secure.
50

Walter Ego,

Durness 15/10/2008 07:07:21
Venerable? Yes.

Could be saved? Yes in short term, no in medium/long term.
51

Malachi Scott,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 07:21:33
The takeover will serve only to weaken Scotland's financial and economic position and ruin Scotland's reputation as a financial centre of excellence, no to mention the negative effect it will have on competition. HBOS was (is) a decent bank and was caught out like many others in tryin to grow too quickly by placing too much reliance on the wholesale money markets. They were not alone in that so why be singled out for a takeover if other political motives aren't behind this? HBOS would be able to address the position suitably within a few years if the same level of support that was being afforded to other banks was given to it. RBS will ride this out. HBOS could too.

And one point that everybody seems to have missed, is that Lloyds TSB, the so called "white knight" is also in the humiliating position of having to ask for tax payers' money. Why has nobody called for the resignation of Eric Daniels and Victor Blanc? Could it be because Gordon is protecting them to ensure his plan to rid Scotland of it's banks is kept on track?

HBOS should be kept independent in the interests of competition, the Scottish economy (independent or not) and to safeguard thousands of Scottish jobs.

52

JulesF,

Kirkliston 15/10/2008 07:35:26
#5

'HBOS would benefit from a de-merger into its Bank of Scotland and Halifax parts.'

Nail, Head hit !!

Demerge them and then let Halifax and Lloyds get on with it !
53

Evan Owen,

Snowdonia 15/10/2008 07:37:58
Look, that bank is a dead parrot, move on for goodness sake, start up another bank from scratch! A new model, devoid of any unkown warts and boils, one without all the flaws.

What shall we call it?

Banco Scotty?
54

Rodster,

Glasgow 15/10/2008 07:44:26
I have copied this from a thread on |The Herald it is something everyone should read , it shows the lies and deceit of Quislings like Murphy and Brown.
Thanks Scunnert in the Herald for finding this.


Irish economist Marc Coleman on the supposed demise of the arc of prosperity and Jim Murphy's ill-advised comments:

I DON'T know which is more shocking about Jim Murphy's recent comments on Ireland's economy. As Secretary of State for Scotland, presumably carrying a degree of responsibility for managing Scotland's economy, the incompetence is staggering. More shocking still is the use of megaphone diplomacy – for the most selfish of political reasons – at such a sensitive time, when loose talk by politicians can do damage.
But let me put my native pride aside and get down to the real issue: the economic illiteracy revealed in Mr Murphy's comments. In contrast to Alex Salmond, the SNP leader, and George Osborne, the Tory shadow chancellor – both of whom have visited Ireland to look at our economy – Mr Murphy hasn't bothered to study what is going on in Ireland, nor in his own country. Equating Iceland with Ireland is very wide of the mark.

In Ireland, swift and decisive action by Ireland's government has protected our bank deposits, but also those with UK Post Office Savings Bank, which is owned by Bank of Ireland, not to mention the Irish subsidiaries or arms of five other UK-based banks. At 25 per cent, Ireland's debt-to-GDP ratio is the second-lowest in the European Union.

At most, recapitalising our banks will add seven percentage points to that, bringing it to perhaps the fourth-lowest. If there is one thing Ireland isn't, it's insolvent. Unlike Iceland, Ireland's euro membership protects us from exchange-rate pressures and limits the risk premiums paid on government debt.

EU and euro membership, plus a business-friendly tax regime, makes Ireland a world beater in foreign direct investment and a home to leading high-technology multinationals. Add
55

PJ Walker,

East Lothian 15/10/2008 07:52:22
HBOS, should, and will, accept any deal handed to them. Beggars can't be chooser's. Apart from Lloyd's TSB I don't see any other institution offering to take on their massive liabilities.

Incidentally, I wonder what will happen to Loch Lomond Golf Club, now £70 million in debt, according to the latest from Companies House. Guess who their bank is?
56

McNasty,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 07:55:55
Has anyone seen the Irish government rowing across the Irish Sea begging the British Government to take them back?
57

1745,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 07:56:14
It is good to see a well presented and thoughtful article in The SCOTSMAN. It was apparent from the begining that this deal was all about Scotland becoming Independent rather than about HBOS being in trouble.GBrown hates Scotland and will do his utmost to make sure that the deal he set up will go through. We can hope that shareholders will boot this deal out.
58

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 15/10/2008 07:58:32
#54 Salem

"A nation is usually a sovereign state organized under an independent government."

Wrong, a nation is any group that identifies themselves as such. You are confusing this with Nation State which is how most nations have organized themselves. That is way Kurds are nation. Scots are a nation. Iroquois are a nation. And even the English are a nation. There is however no nation called British.
59

Dissector,

Stirling 15/10/2008 08:08:13
Selective amnesia coupled with 20/20 hindsight and head in the sand.
HBOS needed £100Bn over 6 - 9 months to refinance its mortgage book - that's over 2 1/2 x the annual block grant to Follyrood while the wholesale money markets are barely operating at 10% let alone the 100% needed on this occasion. - no takeover = complete loss as per Lehmanns - no doubt that appeals to the lunatics running the asylum.
60

Guga II,

Rockall 15/10/2008 08:18:19
The Hootsmon seems to be attempting to get its act together. This is a good, well analysed article and shows support for Scotland.

#5. "HBOS would benefit from a de-merger into its Bank of Scotland and Halifax parts".

Couldn't agree more.

#70. Totally agree.

That liar and charlatan, Maggie Broon, is the one responsible for this situation. He has been in charge of the YUK finances for 11 years, and has badly mismanaged things. He is now trying to further his sell out of Scotland and the Scottish people by, among other things, selling out the BoS to his English banking buddies.

None of this would have happened if Scotland had been independent as, among other things, we would have had a huge oil fund. All our revenues would not have been stolen by the English to subsidise London.
61

StopTheNumpties,

Flying Circus 15/10/2008 08:23:43
It's passed on. This bank is no more. It has ceased to be. It's expired and gone to meet its maker. This is a late bank. It's a stiff. Bereft of life, it rests in peace. If you hadn't nailed it to the highlands, it would be pushing up the daisies. It's run down the curtain and joined the choir invisible. This is an ex-bank.
62

Beergut,

Embra 15/10/2008 08:24:58
I don't suppose Gordon's recent dive in the opinion polls together with his colleagues' baying for his resignation coupled with the imminent prospect of a humiliating defeat in his Glenrothes backyard has anything to do with it - does it?
63

subrosa,

15/10/2008 08:25:00
# 47 'Democracy. Do you read the news? Edinburgh is not a major financial player. It was a minor financial player until a few weeks ago.'

Many of the world economic experts say UK is a minor financial player also. Haven't you read the papers yet this morning?
64

Dillipod,

London 15/10/2008 08:31:43
I am a Scot, a customer of BOS since 1957, and a shareholder in LTSB.

No way will I vote for the merger as its not in the interests of LTSB.

Ideally the BOS should demerge from HBOS. The merger with Halifax was only slightly less bad than the abortive merger with Abbey National, who have had to welcome the embrace of Banc Santander.

I wrote to the then chairman of BOS to protest against the Abbey merger, but as a customer I had no power.

In the old days (I'm still just alive), I could telephone my branch in Aberfeldy, and whoever answered the phone would recognise my voice. Now its a call centre in Dundee and unless I can remember my telephone banking password, a nightmare to do anything.

I also bank with Banco de Andalucia, the Manager greets me like a friend, we joke and laugh.

Get that from HBOS???
65

Auld Twa,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 09:00:18
One thing that is emerging from this financial fiasco is that our unelected Prime Minister has a worrying amount of power. (Far more the the elected President of the USA.)
He has more or less forced the Merger of HBOS and Lloyds TSB.
He has used UK anti terror legislation to grab an Icelandic bank and sell off its UK assets.
These are just two examples of the dictatorial powers of his office.
Is anyone else concerned about this ?
66

Fairfax,

15/10/2008 09:03:45
Malachi Scott (64): "HBOS was . . . caught out like many others in tryin to grow too quickly by placing too much reliance on the wholesale money markets. They were not alone in that so why be singled out for a takeover if other political motives aren't behind this?"

They're not alone in this, but the size of their liabilities is vital: HBOS must refinance more than £100 billion over the next year. Whilst technically solvent at present, in the sense that its book assets exceed liabilities, this burden implies that it will either (i) be wholly nationalized, (ii) be subsumed into a financial institution with more ready cash, augmented by part-nationalization, or (iii) be allowed to fail. Now (iii) is too risky to allow at present, so the choices are (i) or (ii).

"HBOS would be able to address the position suitably within a few years if the same level of support that was being afforded to other banks was given to it."

It's not impossible, but the £100 billion of short-term debt, once financed by the wholesale credit markets, imply that this is unlikely unless full nationalization occurred.

"And one point that everybody seems to have missed, is that Lloyds TSB, the so called "white knight" is also in the humiliating position of having to ask for tax payers' money."

It's not clear to me that Lloyds TSB would need these funds were it not for its involvement with the HBOS deal. Lloyds TSB was even less exposed to the wholesale markets than Barclays. This, I think, is the primary reason why their CEO does not have to resign. In my view the best route for Lloyds TSB would be to withdraw from the HBOS deal and follow Barclays, avoiding government funds. This would leave RBS part-nationalized and HBOS fully-nationalized.
67

Freshford Fresh,

Dundee 15/10/2008 09:18:05
#24 - What you are saying is factual and makes a lot of sense. However, what you seem to have overlooked in your haste to pour scorn on this article is that having "The Bank's" HQ in Edinburgh and its name gives the people of Scotland some sense of ownership whether they are shareholders or not. That's certainly good enough for me and I am very relieved the Scotsman has decided to demand answers over this disgraceful deal. Sir Victor Blank must have been rubbing his hand at the prospect of this when he knew fine well his own bank was close to going under - and then turning up at the meeting in that stupid, little car. What a banker!
68

Calum10,

15/10/2008 09:23:43
If you want to save the Bank of Scotland and thousands of Scottish jobs vote SNP.

That is the only message that Westminster understands.
69

Fairfax,

15/10/2008 09:25:46
Freshford Fresh (80): "having "The Bank's" HQ in Edinburgh and its name gives the people of Scotland some sense of ownership whether they are shareholders or not."

That's a good point, but it brings responsibilities with it. If Scots view HBOS (or BoS) as "their" bank, then Scots should be willing to pay proportionately more to support it. The same also applies to RBS, to some extent. Perhaps it's time for the SNP to put LIT on hold, but to increase income tax by 3%, using the income to buy shares in HBOS (say) from the Treasury.
70

Alastair the First,

15/10/2008 09:26:41
I am astonished at the above article. Practically no attempts to have a gratuitous go at the SNP and a balanced and sensible analysis. I would have expected the Scotsman to pile in on the pro-Labour propaganda but perhaps, just perhaps, they have seen the error of their ways.
71

Olicana,

edinburgh 15/10/2008 09:27:04
Remember it was Scottish Directors and Senior Managers that got the Scottish Banks into this mess. Also a Scottish PM and a Scottish Chancellor.
Bank of Scotland caved in when it merged with Halifax. There is no going back.
72

Voice of reason,

EDINBURGH 15/10/2008 09:28:27
81 -grow up , these banks grew up without the SNP . The Nats would be secretly delighted to see folk lose their jobs .
73

Voice of reason,

EDINBURGH 15/10/2008 09:29:33
84 - well said - can see the Nats twitching uncomfortably in their seats at this .
74

Ugly George,

15/10/2008 09:39:42
62 The Spook
"But the UK government does not have the money either and will borrow it from the world money markets in the form of a gilt auction. An independent Scotland could, arguably, have done the same.

Case rested..."

Not at all. Under what circumstances would this have been done. Issuing £37bn in gilts by an independent Scotland would inevitably have taken total debt well above 60% of GDP. This is not permitted under the Eurozone stability pact so it could not have been done if Scotland were using the Euro.

If Scotland had its proportinate share of UK national debt, that would be approx £50bn. Add £37bn and you get £87bn - in the region of 90% of GDP. In these circumstances any gilts would probably be labelled as "junk bonds"
75

Cheradenine,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 09:39:48
Although not one that the First Minister understands it seems, he won't even support a motion (from one of his own MSPS, text below) at the Scotish Parliament calling for HBOS to remain independent, the only ones calling for that are the Lib Dems!

S3M-02713 Alex Neil (Central Scotland) (Scottish National Party): HBOS Takeover— That the Parliament gives a general welcome to the measures taken by the UK and other governments to tackle the current banking crisis; but calls on the UK Government to reverse its decision to make the Lloyds TSB takeover of HBOS a condition of its bail-out funding; considers that the promises of the Lloyds TSB management that only the Scottish headquarters of the merged bank would be retained in Edinburgh is a totally inadequate response to Scottish demands and would result in a huge loss of jobs and decision-making powers in Scotland, particularly in Edinburgh and Fife, and calls on the UK Government to use its stakeholding in HBOS to retain it as an independent bank with its corporate headquarters in Edinburgh and to make this a condition of funding for HBOS.
76

noswod,

Honestas 15/10/2008 09:41:32
RBS & HBOS bit the dust because of overambitious and poorly controlled CEO's an accountant and a MBA who did not know anything about banking risk and the cycles that underpin the banking business. Otherwise the CEO's of these banks should have been men in their Fifties who had been with the bank for 40 years. The systems of Financial and Corporate Governence failed, the 80bn take over of Amro was maddness. In a Scottish context where we are going to take on the world and play in the Premier league the truth is now out there. This cycle of overambition/illusion is further illustrated by Slamond, the elite ex RBS economist, asking the UK Government for an extra £1bn yesterday so that he can increase capital expenditure in the Scottish economy while at the same time freezing capital expenditure by virtue of the Public Trust concept. I am going to be waiting a long time for my train from Hawick.
77

Cheradenine,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 09:41:57
Sorry that was to #81
78

BIG EYE,

Paisley 15/10/2008 09:51:13
Two points

1.If there is any major currency weakening against a strong pound I must have missed this. The £is about 20% down on the euro this year at least!

2. We now have the novel move by Labour to attack and demean our Irish neighbours, despite their debt ratios being much better than the UK's. When exactly did it become a good tactic for Labour in Scotland to attack the Irish. I had always thought most of them in Scotland voted Labour. Not anymore I think!
79

wright,

London 15/10/2008 09:52:23
Why would a LLoyds shareholder vote for a takeover of HBOS. We have been accustomed to good dividens and banking stability.We now face no dividends ,a lower share price and government control in a company that is basically solid.I would be amazed if this goes through
80

Douglas Eckhart,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 09:53:47
'Scotland being another iceland'.

Utter ignorance - if only these idiots actually read any thing about the standard of living in Iceland compared to breakdown Britain - not the utterly insulting comments from fools like Muphy and Brown.

If only we were more like Iceland - one of the highest literacy rates, one of the best quality of life ratings, lowest crime, one of the best environmental policies. Scotland and the UK don't even come close and the comments coming from Brown and Labour smack of UK parochialism and lack of knowledge.

Sure they will have a hard time for a while, what nation doesnt? but they will get through it - do you see them running to hide under the wings of former masters Denmark? not likely.

As with Ireland - i don't see them running to apply for UK membership any time soon. That's because no matter what the circumstances, they have self respect and the ability to stand on their own two feet - and they will. Iceland will prove that small countries survive all manner of circumstances, just as large countries do. This crisis has shown that everyone has been exposed and the size of your country has not protected you, in fact it's left you more at risk.

81

Arfur,

15/10/2008 10:09:45
"THE Scotsman is today demanding answers about the HBOS takeover in a bid to secure the best deal for the nation" - only about 2 weeks behind the rest of the country but ok.

Other than that this is actually a well balanced and unbiased story. Well done hootsman. Try keep it up.

#26 Richard1 - """The situation for Scotland had it been Independent would have been much worse.

Think about it,those lovely 'Short' traders would have known the Scottish GDP could not have covered the losses they would have continued until they crushed the banks.

It is about time the SNP come into the real world,you could have been another Iceland!"""

Where do i start? First of all Salmond asked Brown to do something about short selling TWO WEEKS before the HBOS problem (which was ignored) it is safe to assume he would have done something in an independant Scotland.

Secondly An independant Scotland would not have had Brown in charge of its finances for the last 10 years deepening this problem.

Thirdly Salmond would have supported 100% of deposits giving confidence to the banks.

This mess is all due to the union.
82

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 10:16:33
26/96
Short selling is a red herring. There was a degree of hysteria over this a few weeks agowith some claiming it caused the problem with HBOS. But it has been banned for weeks and the problems remain.
83

Publius,

London 15/10/2008 10:30:45
Couple of comments on the article:
1. "Roger Lawson, from the UK Shareholders Association, said he also believed that the deal should be completely reassessed. He is a shareholder in Lloyds TSB and he questioned the deal at a presentation by the bank yesterday."
This means that Lawson thinks the deal is bad for LloydsTSB shareholders - not HBOS shareholders.
2. "Among the senior business figures demanding a rethink is Donald Macdonald of the Macdonald Hotels chain."
I seem to recollect that Macdonald Hotels are owned by HBOS and leased back to the Macdonald company on very favourable terms. HBOS shareholders deserve better than this.

The only thing that will keep HBOS independent is LloydsTSB walking away from the merger. The government would then have to cope with a supersized Northern Rock.


84

,

15/10/2008 10:34:15
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
85

,

15/10/2008 10:36:27
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
86

Publius,

London 15/10/2008 10:36:46
#96 Arfur

Comparisons of Scotland and Iceland are silly. There are only 300,000 people in Iceland and there is no urban/industrial legacy from the past.

As for no crime, what about taking savings from individuals in the UK and other countries and the closing the banks down? This amounts to stealing billions.
87

,

15/10/2008 10:39:35
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
88

Paul in Oz,

Helensburgh 15/10/2008 10:41:04
THE SCOTSMAN DEMANDS, THE SCOTSMAN DEMANDS.......WHO THE HELL ARE THEY TO DEMAND ANYTHING?

IDIOTS!
89

,

15/10/2008 10:41:31
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
90

,

15/10/2008 10:42:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
91

,

15/10/2008 10:44:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
92

,

15/10/2008 10:49:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
93

Fairfax,

15/10/2008 10:51:43
Publius (99): "The only thing that will keep HBOS independent is LloydsTSB walking away from the merger. The government would then have to cope with a supersized Northern Rock."

Given the size of HBOS short-term debt, I think that's likely in any case. In other words, the merger is likely to lead to the demise of two banks rather than one. I now cannot see any advantage to LloydsTSB here: the risky assets of HBOS' mortgage customers are dwarfed by their wholesale credit mark legacy debt.

94

,

15/10/2008 10:52:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
95

Freshford Fresh,

Dundee 15/10/2008 11:05:03
# 82 Fairfax. That's also a good point and I would echo 101's question here.

Congratulations Wee Berty, you have exposed yourself as a little unstable and managed to take this debate to a very low level. Ever wonder why nobody really bothers to respond to your mad ramblings?
96

thistle do,

here n' there 15/10/2008 11:08:40
Wee Berty is on top form today. HBOS maybe WAS a great bank with a long proud history. Now it's just a another bunch of banker' disaster story. Salmond's had it right up him, who cares if a bank is national or not. The main question should be if it is solvent.

Also I note that "The Scotsman demands....", another arrogant stance from a bunch of nobodies and mini players.

Keep up the good work Wee Berty.
97

,

15/10/2008 11:24:58
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
98

Vox Cavalier,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 11:27:34
Below is an Advert which appeared on a UK website last week - Interested Andy or Fred?

Working within a small team, you are responsible for the formulation and execution of the sales plan for Fantasy Finance games and associated products. As well as proactively securing new business, you also have a key role to play in planning and forecasting sales, ensuring all targets are...
99

Sassenach Observer,

on his way up the Mound 15/10/2008 11:32:32
Too little, too late. Where was all this concern when the British Linen Bank was subsumed into this gang of dodgy Jacobite moneylenders. Bring back the Linen Bank, I say. Then if they looked like going bust, they could re-open the branches as Gift Shoppes and sell the banknotes as tea towels.
100

Douglas Eckhart,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 11:33:04
There is NO SUCH thing as Independence anyway. The world is now an entity that is linked. NO country is really independent
--------------------

Oh right 'Wee Berty', well, lets dissolve Westminster then as it is not really independent, in fact lets disolve Europe.. oh and what's that about Iceland?

Well, 1: it is false to compare the current economic crisis affecting a micro-economy like Iceland with Scotland, iceland is a country outside the EU with a population the size of Edinburgh, but you wouldnt know that coming from your parochial UK mindset

2: Iceland's highest quality of life ratings are down to good government and not debt as you suggest. They will ride out the storm and Iceland will still be there, no matter how much you stick your head in the sand. How will Iceland 'go down the pan' exactly?' - They will go through a period of nationalisation and then branch out again into private sphere as before. Your comments are utter tosh from an individial who has no idea of what is actually occuring in other countries around him.
101

Sassenach Observer,

worrying about the workers 15/10/2008 11:35:54
If Halifax and BoS demerge what would they do about the workers ? Obviously the Halifax would get Howard and BoS would get to keep the fat bird but what would happen to the little chinese bloke with the silly hairdo ?
102

Sassenach Observer,

reporting for News International 15/10/2008 11:41:11
#119 Actually here at the NoW (Scottish Edition) we will be demanding to know why Fred Goodwin allowed a "paedo" to open an account (when we've found one) and revealing that one of his distant relations in Paisley is a seedy lapdancer who has sh*gged several Old Firm players.
103

Fairfax,

15/10/2008 11:44:59
Le Lutin (101): "Interesting option
Have you costed it?"

It's a 3% increase in Scottish income tax, so costs itself. It's really only a nominal amount: as one of the evil English, posited as the ultimate reason for HBOS' fate by some of the above posters, I would prefer Scotland to partly support its rhetoric with money.
104

Zedwed,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 11:46:11
Unbelievably I have read ALL the comments, and found them ALL heartily refreshing and deeelightful.
I am thinking of taking out a large bank loan to buy bank shares today.
Can anyone recommend a good buy?
105

Sassenach Observer,

behind a grassy knoll 15/10/2008 11:55:40
I fondly imagine the comments on Scotsman articles are all written by people with nothing much else to do - very like those depicted on the never-ending "Last of the Summer Wine" - which interestingly is filmed very near Halifax. A conspiracy perhaps ?
106

Navvy,

15/10/2008 12:01:14
Bank of Scotland the Jacobite bank

Royal Bank of Scotland the Honovarian or Unionist bank
107

Navvy,

15/10/2008 12:03:25
Is it really true that Murphy the new Secretary of State has never been to Ireland the lad of his fathers?
108

,

15/10/2008 12:17:32
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
109

,

15/10/2008 12:19:53
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
110

,

15/10/2008 12:23:11
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
111

Alastair the First,

15/10/2008 12:35:14
131: That is a disgraceful attitude. Running up debts and no intention of meeting them? You are nothing more than a common thief.
112

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 12:43:13
131 WeeBerty
"Bankruptcy is fine and dandy to me. AND then my wife will run up a fortune as well. Thank u banks and their greedy shareholders"

Most of the shares in banks and other big companies are held by schemes such as pension funds. You are, in effecr, stealinjg from peoples' pension funds. As if this was not bad enough, you come on here and boast about it.
113

Douglas Eckhart,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 12:47:12
Wee Berty, you say the parliament is 'a glorified council'. I would like to ask you whose fault that is? People like you perhaps?

Also, even with its restricted powers at present, it's a funny 'council' that has a seperate criminal justice system, education system and police system; the fact that they are carried over from 1707 matters not a hoot - they are governed by Holyrood.

Also, I love your fantasy comment about 'powers that can be removed by Westminster'.
I would love to see them try - wouldnt you?

They wouldnt dare, hence the parliament is defacto autonomous in all areas NOT reserved to Westminster - that's the reality my friend, no matter how much you bury your head in the sand and wish devolution never happened: do you still have your 'NO/NO' campaign posters on your bedroom wall? Must be gathering dust by now ;-)
114

SkeptikScot,

15/10/2008 12:50:37
The only thing Scottish about HBOS and RBS is having the word 'Scotland' in the name - and the fact that some of the jobs are here. I don't feel any emotional connection at all to 'The Bank'/s. They were certainly very badly run and used faulty business models. And their branches are like mobile phone shops - try asking to see the Bank Manager.

Scotland needs a balanced economy and must move away from the over-emphasis on financial services. We must face the fact that it is an industry that in future will be slimmed down and much less profitable. How about inventing and making things again?
115

Arfur,

15/10/2008 12:52:46
#102 WeeBerty - I know that this is a global problem. What i was trying to get across (unsuccesfully) was - the reason we (Scotland) are in SUCH a mess is because of the union - i.e. we are far worse of than the likes of Germany, Italy, France etc etc ect and this is due to Brown allowing idiotic lending to get out of hand. No Union - No Brown. Another reason the we (Scotland) are in such a mess is because Brown has managed to almost bring down two of Scotlands biggest employers for the sake of this union.

#103 Publius - i didnt compare Scotland and Iceland - i was quoting Richard1.
116

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 12:57:31
137 Salem
"If one sets aside the comments of intellectually challenged retards, calling each other fools and idiots"

then this thread would be virtually empty.
117

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 13:33:37
140 Salem
It appears that, between us, we have silenced every body - no posts for 37 minutes.
118

Pundit,

Glasgow 15/10/2008 13:48:18
#141 aaah you spoiled it I thought we could go a whole hour. Its ok they will soon be back from their lunches
119

Son of one of Stirlings finest,

Weston S Mare 15/10/2008 13:59:57
WeeBerty 109, is it true if I t*ss my caber to much I will go blind, perhaps I could just do it a little bit and wear glasses, what is your advice.
120

Steve 'The Nugget' Davis,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 14:29:34
From reading the comments from posters, you'd hardly know that the article was about the potential for HBOS to remain an independent entity. The fact is that we are where we are, but most of you seem intent on arguing about what might have been yet nobody seems interested in supporting a cause that will help to keep thousands of Scots in employment.

What I can't get my head around is that the 'national interest' argument for the government to bypass competition law, regarding the LTSB/HBOS take-over, surely can't remain when billions of pounds worth of capital and funding has been guaranteed for the banks. Had this been the case a few weeks ago, HBOS would have survived - so why is it now in the national interest to bypass the competition laws?

The government seems to have two choices:

1. Push the transaction through and ensure that tens of thousands of people are made redundant, claim benefits and don't pay tax. Also, this would create a banking giant and massively reduce competition in UK banking - increasing the margins on mortgages and reducing available savings rates.

2. Support HBOS as a separate entity, save thousands of jobs, maximise tax revenues, and keep a healthy level of competition in the market.
121

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 15/10/2008 14:38:01
Ahhh, the Scotsman pretending that it actually cares. Pathetic !
122

1stEdinburgh,

Scotland 15/10/2008 14:41:58
Surely option 2 is the better alternative.
As I said in another post, let's all get behind the Scotsman and campaign for it.
Also SNP/ScotLibs/ScotTories to pass a motion in the Scottish Parliament to prevent this forced merger - sponsored by the Labour Gov't and funded by the UK taxpayer.
123

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 15/10/2008 14:46:41
#98 George

"But it [short selling] has been banned for weeks and the problems remain." My parentheses].

George, that argument does not stand up to scrutiny. The fact that the problems do remain does not necessarily mean that short selling did not play a significant part in getting us to where we are. As you know, confidence was shattered and that is still the case. That is why bank shares are so volatile.
124

1stEdinburgh,

Scotland 15/10/2008 14:46:50
I posted this earlier in a related topic - apologies for repeating and double-posting here, but I think is relevant/important:
-------------------
Can the SNP/ScotLibs/Scottish Conservatives raise a motion and block this absurd takeover in the Scottish Parliamnt? Why are UK taxpayers' money used to give a competitive advantage to one bank (Lloyds TSB) over the rest? If If it weren't for the incompetent former Chief Executive of HBOS 'no time for a novice' Andy Hornby and his ASDA-type expansion plans, this great bank would still be independent.
People will realise what a disaster this forced merger will be - if it were allowed to happen - in the years to come. Lloyds TSB is the banking equivalent to TESCO. They are currently outsourcing all their IT Dept to India! It is going to be the same for HBOS and a bloodbath for anyone working at HBOS branches.
The biggest myth - ie that Lloyds TSB is the most efficient/trusted/etc bank - has been proved a lie, by accepting the Gov't rescue money, unlike Barclays, HSBC and others, so in effect this Labour Gov't is sponsoring the takeover! Someone ought to ask why and for what return? A seat for Mr Brown and Mr Darling in a future board when they are kicked out of Gov't?
125

Mcavity1uk,

Stirling 15/10/2008 15:22:17
Of course the takeoer deal will go through because we have been set up and shafted. Gordon Brown has taken the opportunity of this crisis to gain control over Scottish financial affairs by using the pathetic Lloyds TSB to get HBOS finally under English control. No amount of reasoned argument will stop this move. He (via Darling) deliberately talked down HBOS shares, THEN announced the TSB takeover and ONLY THEN prohibited short selling. The latest cash is only being made available ON CONDITION thaT the takeover goes ahead. When will Scots wake up?!
126

nostress,

grangemouth 15/10/2008 16:05:30
Why is our superhero flash-in-the-pan gordon so keen to see LloydsTSB swallow HBOS? He takes every opportunity to speak of it as a done deal, yet I would have thought it wasn't a prime minister's place to make such statements. Surely, it is up to the shareholders of both institutions to decide on the outcome? I would be grateful if someone more au fait with these matters could explain this to me, because the way I see it, superbroon seems to be just a bit too keen on this takeover.

Oh, just an aside really, but BoS lost any real Scottish identity when they were taken over by Halifax...
127

1stEdinburgh,

scotland 15/10/2008 16:26:17
Why is Gordon so keen and 'hands-on' on this deal which I hope that doesn't go through? Has he got shares on Lloyds TSB or being promised anything in return for his part in securing the deal (donation to his/party coffers?). Whatever he's staked his reputation on, he's treading on very thin ice here. Hope (at least the Scottish) shareholders turn it down (needs 75% approval) in the knowledge that even if it doesn't go through, there will be a better offer from a Scottish consortium or - worst case scenario - part temporary nationalisation. Firstly though he needs to get a bloody nose in the forthcoming by-election, so urging all non-Labour sane Scottish people (Scottish Conservatives and Libs) to support SNP on this occasion.
128

DHS,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 17:26:33
We needed help at the time of the Halifax takeover, it shouldn't have happened.Since then BoS has been governed by a board who had no idea how to operate a bank, were and still are incompetent.Mortgages, mortgages, mortgages were all they were interested in. BoS in now owned by an English company and will be transferred over to another English owner.
129

Martyk,

Sussex 15/10/2008 18:04:03
Fascinating stuff. As a matter of interest has the Irish Gov actually spent any money protecting their financial institutions? Or was that blanket guarrantee sufficient? Secondly , painful though it may be for some to accept, Edinburgh/ Scotland is not a major financial centre. How could it be without a Stock Exchange , commodities or Bond exchange etc? Even with HBOS and RBS firing on all cylinders it was never more than third division. By Christmas when the HBOS deal completes it will be fourth division. If RBOS is broken up and sold off as seems likely then bottom half of the fourth division. 88% of the bail out money is earmarked for Scots banks. This is a national humiliation of the highest order on a par with Darien in economic terms. Sorry but the truth is best dealt with head on.
130

Nevsky,

Moscow 15/10/2008 18:15:39
160 Martyx#

It's not Darien, what a riduculous thing to say. Banks have failed all over Europe, been divided, nationalised and backed; in fact the two first to go were both English, Northern Rock and Bradford and Bingley.

This is a massive squeeze that has been put on otherwise sound institutions on a global scale with global repercussions; no country has escaped.

Some countries have cunshioned the blow such as Ireland who have not spent a bean so far while for the UK quite what the long-tern fallout will be not even the government can tell you!
131

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 18:35:14
161 Nevski
"Banks have failed all over Europe"

That is a strange assertion from you. I thought that you were telling us that all of this was a UK problem and the other European countries are fine. You really need to develop some consistency in your arguments rather than dotting about all over the place.
132

Martyk,

15/10/2008 18:35:42
I disagree Nevsky. Northern Rock and B and B were minor compared to the 2 Scots banks. If you look at the issue proportionately to the size of economy then Scotlands banking woes are the most critical in the world bar Iceland. Scotlands 2 locally HQ"d banks were both within hours of complete collapse and were saved by a Gov bailout. I dont like it and I doubt you like it but thats the reality. As for the Darien comparison. It destroyed Scotlands financial independence and led directly to the Union. This fiasco will destroy what remains of Scotlands financial independence and has probably ended any hope of an independent Scotland for a generation. I havent seen any comparisons but have any other countries in Europe been hit as hard as the UK and Iceland?
133

James Kelly,

Bonnyrigg 15/10/2008 18:36:49
I remember reading that RBS stood to benefit to the tune of £15bn from the US £700bn bailout. If Scotland were independent, would it be the case that it would have an English banking license and this business i.e. NatWest, would receive support from an English bailout, making the figure of £37bn to be found irrelevant?
134

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 15/10/2008 18:45:47
151 connaughtboy
"But it [short selling] has been banned for weeks and the problems remain." My parentheses].

George, that argument does not stand up to scrutiny. The fact that the problems do remain does not necessarily mean that short selling did not play a significant part in getting us to where we are. As you know, confidence was shattered and that is still the case. That is why bank shares are so volatile"

Do you know how short selling works? To make a profit on a short selling contract you have to buy back in to close the position. So, by its very nature, short selling must involve as much buying as it does selling. It is therefore not possible to undermine a share in the long term just by shorting it. If the share price falls consistently over a period of time it must be as a result of persistent lack of confidence in the company.
135

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 15/10/2008 20:25:14
So the Euro has shrunk against the pound, eh?

That'll be why the mid-market rates are exactly the same as they were in June. Went to Amsterdam for Christmas 07 and got 1.345 to the pound from No1currency. They are 1.245 at the moment. Eurotabac in Spain is generally giving 1% better than No1.

I check XE.com and the above 2 every day.

Get your facts right, Scotsman, before you print your fiction.
136

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 15/10/2008 20:31:47
Just a thought. Is this wee story the end of Broon's boom, as the media gushed about the saviour of the universe?

Will bust follow on?

Has Flash Gordon become Crash Gordon?

Flash in the pan? Doon the pan?

Will Britnat trolls (lostinspace.commers) slash their wrists?

Find out next month on Glenrothes.
137

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 15/10/2008 21:43:42
Has nobody realised that the best shares worth buying are HBOS?

85.0843pence at the moment.

The majority of shareholders are private and if we all agree to purchase some then the government's percentage will drop. The bank is guaranteed by Broon - on his "honour".

Go buy. And buy now.


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


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.