Steve Bargeton lambasts Enterprise Minister, Jim Mather in today’s political diary in the Dundee Courier for making a remark during a debate on the banking industry.
In response to a comment by Jim Purvis the Lib Dems finance spokesman at Holyrood that Scotland ought to shoulder its fair share of the blame for the banking crisis given that two of the biggest disasters were Scottish based banks. Jim said “Having read about six books on the subject and not seen that hypothesis being put forward by anyone, I am fascinated to know what basis the member has for coming up with that assertion”.
Steve quite rightly points out that both the banks in question are based in Scotland and have the word Scotland in their name. But it is there as far as I can see that their Scottishness ends.
The two in question are doubtless HBOS and the Royal Bank of Scotland.
HBOS will be HALIFAX Bank of Scotland and as far as I am aware Halifax is not in Scotland. Also as I remember that the Halifax was considerably bigger than the Bank of Scotland when the two merged.
The other one will be the Royal Bank of Scotland which if memory serves me rightly included the much larger Nat West. And that was most certainly not a Scottish bank. Clearly they kept what they thought was the better name because it had “royal” in it.
So sorry Steve on this one you are wrong and Jim Mather is right. I find it incredible that the Lib Dems are pedalling that sort of tripe in the Scottish Parliament. Let’s get it through all our heads once and for all those two banks were not Scottish and their disastrous policies were not a result of Scottish mismanagement.
Yes we can safely say no Scottish person or of Scots descent had any responsibility for or connection to the banking crisis.
ReplyDeleteIn fact any suggestion that 'Scottish' and 'mismanagement' could at any time throughout recorded and unrecorded history be even contemplated let alone spoken aloud.
Is profoundly anti-snp Oops i meant anti the concept of 'Scottishness'
a state of being which precludes any base or criminal behavior or thought an unknown in Scotland before the act of union.
Many studies have shown the fact any scots who have transgressed against the concept of 'Scottishness' have DNA of other races infecting them mainly from south of the border(you know who).
Mr MixedPickle the point is the banks are not in actual fact Scottish banks as the English banks they merged with were bigger than they were. Its a question of its british when it is good and Scottish when it is bad.
ReplyDeleteMunguin
ReplyDelete" their disastrous policies were not a result of Scottish mismanagement."
I'm not so sure. Didn't Scotsman Fred 'the shred' Goodwin buy ABnAmro despite warnings of the disaster it would cause ( Northern Rock folded a month before ). Didn't RBS dine out on it's Scottishness. Backing Scottish rugby and building a massive gin palace with private saunas and swimming pools and even a private road for Fred to get to the airport without being hindered by the proletariat ?
The management at Bank of Scotland were Scottish when they sold out to Halifax.
Dunfermline BS were Scottish when they fell for the subprime mortgage scam.
I think we should shoulder a lot of the blame for the UK's bankruptcy.
Jim Mather should be ignored. He's a yes man for the green energy companies and will bankrupt us.
The fact remains that both of them were not Scottish banks at all no matter what the PR and hype say. Both merged with bigger English banks. So if anything they were British banks.
ReplyDeleteI think it is good PR to be Scottish, which is why the Halifax kept its ceremonial head office in Scotland but in fact was really run from Yorkshire.
ReplyDeleteI don't think anyone would deny that Fred or rather Sir Fred, (for services to banking) (bet that's embarrassing now...or, nope, on reflection it won't be bothering anyone) anyway, he was a twit. And yes that's understating it for politeness purposes.
Truth is that we have to share a bit of responsibility, but it was the London FSA that didn't do anything about how badly any of these banks were risking their position. The Bank of England did nothing and it was the London government that had the powers to do something about it.
Edinburgh had none, and who knows what would ahve happened if it had been in the hands of Jock McConnel and then Alex Salmond.
PS. Why is the British Bank called the Bank of England?
Munguin
ReplyDelete" their disastrous policies were not a result of Scottish mismanagement"
Ok Scottish people mismanagement. We can't be trusted when given control. We sell out to the highest bidder. I'm not sure who RBS sold out to though. Bank of Scotland made a lot of Scots rich when they sold out to Halifax. We love to blame the FSA but the FSA didn't march Fred to the ABnAmro deal. Didn't march Dunfermline to buy rubbish assets that someone with as little knowledge as me wouldn't touch with a bargepole. The whole subrime collapse was well documented in tons of websites that were ignored.
http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/ was warning of the impending doom 5 years before the gorgon or his puppet noticed.
It goes back hundreds of years to the Union when Scots sold out their country for money and land. We're a sell out country.
tris
ReplyDelete" PS. Why is the British Bank called the Bank of England? "
I'll forgive your ignorance. Scotland sold out in 1707 and gave up it's independence. Previously there was a Bank of Scotland. Older than the English version by hundreds of years. After we signed the 'Act of Union' the Bank of England was recognised as the main banker for the UK. The Bank of Scotland was allowed to issue banknotes although they wereen't seen as legal tender in Tescos etc.
Isn't selling out what everybody does in the end. Its called business isnt it? Ask Lord Sugar.
ReplyDeleteThe Bank of England was established in 1694 and the Bank of Scotland in 1695.
ReplyDeleteFormer SNP.
ReplyDeleteHow very magnanimous of you to forgive my ignorance on my own blog.
Actually, it isn't really ignorance. The question I was asking related to why the new country, created by the Act of Union, didn’t have a central bank that reflected its name, not the name of a part of it?
tris
ReplyDeleteSorry didn't mean to be rude.
The Act of Union wasn't anything to do with fairness. The stronger partner took control so their bank won.
Apology accepted.
ReplyDeleteBut we are told we are all equal partners now in this accursed union, so why doesn't the modern day bank reflect that fact that Welsh poeple and Irish people and Scots have to depend upon this bank too for their money supply. Not just the colonial masters.
Wouldn't it have been considered at some time good PR to call the bank that dealt with money in Britian, the Bank Of Britain, instead of the Bank of England?
In modern times there would be (buzz word) inclusion involved. You'd have thought that the half wit Brown would have thought of that.