The Virtual Pub
Come Inside... => The Commons => Topic started by: Snoopy on October 09, 2008, 07:33:59 AM
-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7660438.stm
Many local authorities across the UK seem to have placed substantial sums with Icelandic Banks in the hopes of making a few extra £s. OK they claim this is investment to enable them to keep council taxes down but what was wrong with investing in British Banks, keeping the money at home where it belongs. At best they might have got an additional .5% interest but they are most surely not mandated to gamble with our money. They are legally charged to get the best value and best value has to include security of the funds. FFS they could have bought Savings Bonds from HM Government with a guaranteed return in absolute safety.
The truth is our elected councillors thought they were being smart, hiding from Government and us, the taxpayers, just how much spare wonga they had laying around. Well they have been caught out. Any councillor who has agreed with this practice should now be barred from public office.
Come on ~ you've all met some of your local council members and met the numpties they employ in their offices. Would you trust them to make a wise financial decision that wasn't directly related to their own pockets?
-
No.
-
Terror law used for Iceland deposits
By FT reporters
Published: October 8 2008 17:11 | Last updated: October 8 2008 22:54
Anti-terrorism powers were used on Wednesday to recoup money owed to UK depositors in a failed Icelandic bank in a move that risked sending Britain’s relations with Reykjavik to their lowest since the 1970s “cod wars”.
UK taxpayers are likely to pay out at least £2.4bn as part of a £4.6bn scheme to compensate hundreds of thousands of account holders at Landsbanki, the Icelandic lender, according to Whitehall sources.
Alistair Darling, chancellor, offered a blanket guarantee to UK retail depositors with money placed in Icesave, a failed internet bank owned by Landsbanki. But wholesale depositors in failed Icelandic banks – including dozens of local authorities and some universities – were offered no immediate support.
Some councils have lost sums of up to £40m, prompting the Local Government Association, which represents about 400 councils, to urge Mr Darling to extend protection to town halls.
The Conservatives said the black hole was a threat to services and could increase council tax bills. “Government needs to stop dithering and clear up this uncertainty,” said Eric Pickles, shadow local government secretary.
Gordon Brown unveiled “legal action against the Icelandic authorities” to recover depositors’ money, as the tone deteriorated to its lowest level since fishing and coastguard vessels clashed over cod stocks in the north Atlantic in 1976.
The chill came as Geir Haarde, Iceland’s prime minister, expressed disappointment at the refusal of western allies to help prop up the krona and said he had to find “new friends” in the form of Russia, which is considering a €4bn (£3bn) loan.
However, officials from both the UK and Iceland later said that relations were not as bad as the political rhetoric implied.
The Treasury expected Iceland’s depositor compensation scheme to cover about £2.2bn of the £4.6bn owed to about 300,000 Landsbanki depositors, with £1.4bn coming from the UK industry financial services compensation scheme and the remainder from the government.
Public cash would be needed to cover the industry share, the Treasury added, as the compensation scheme lacked sufficient money. It would try to recoup the taxpayers’ contribution later from the proceeds of the sale of Landsbanki’s estimated £7bn UK assets.
Treasury officials wanted to ensure wholesale creditors were treated “fairly”. But Mr Darling told MPs that local authorities – unlike individual depositors – were “informed investors”.
Lawyers said the Treasury’s unprecedented use of anti-terror powers to freeze Landsbanki’s estimated £4bn UK financial assets could create knock-on problems for other institutions with which the failed lender was doing business.
The freezing order was issued under the 2001 Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act that was passed after the September 11 attacks the same year.
-
Yesterday's news ~ things have moved on since then ..... we may send a gunboat ~ if we can find one.
-
BANKS TO LEND YOU YOUR OWN MONEY
THE government is to invest £500bn of your money in British banks so they can lend it back to you with interest.
The historic move is being hailed as a lifeline for the financial system as long as nobody asks too many questions.
Julian Cook, chief economist at Corbett and Barker, said: "The government will give your money to the banks so the banks can start lending you that money, probably at around 7% APR.
"Thanks to all the interest you're paying on your own money, the banks will make billions of pounds again and normality will be restored.
"After a few years of this the government will cash in the bank shares it bought with your money and use the profits to build a huge fucking dome somewhere."
He added: "In case you hadn't already worked it out - the entire global financial system is predicated on the assumption that you're an idiot."
Chancellor Alistair Darling said the decision had been taken in tandem with the banking industry, adding: "They used a lot of dirty words I'd never heard before and one of them had an angry looking dog."
Meanwhile, Emma Bradford, a sales manager from Bath, said: "Why doesn't the government just give my money to me so I can buy stuff from businesses who will then make a profit and put it in a bank?"
-
Not only that but the government has borrowed the mony to lend to the banks and you will have to pay the interest on that as well.
-
Perhaps we should return to barter as a system of commerce.
What can I do for you and what can you do for me in return? eyes:
-
Yesterday's news ~ things have moved on since then ..... we may send a gunboat ~ if we can find one.
Darwin has a shotgun, so if we club together for a dingy would that count?
In answer to the earlier question about knowing a councillor who wasnt interested in his own benefits first, my uncle was a local councillor and had he honestly believed that moving the money to an overseas bank would have benefitted the taxpayer then yes he would have okayed it. Having said that if he had even the slightest doubt about it then he would have told whoever suggested it where to stick the idea.
-
Hard to know what to say to that. No slur intended against your uncle ~ some of my best friends etc ....... BUT
Many present day Councillors like most "National" politicians tend not to be of the brightest. I am always wary of anyone who actually wants to be a politician. Just having that as an ambition should be enough to disqualify anyone.
I can see their argument about seeking the best rates of interest but as anyone knows the higher the rate on offer the higher the risk. Basically they have gambled with our money and lost. It is not now up to the Government, as so many councillors seem to think, to rescue them from their own stupidity for the simple reason that the Government doesn't have any money of its own. It is merely the custodian of OUR money and they have already mortgaged the tax revenues for the next umpteen years.
Sorry but those that gave the go ahead for these "investments" should be barred from office and those that recommended that the councillors should invest our tax revenues with dodgy banks should be sacked for gross dereliction of duty and forfeit their gold plated pensions.
-
Many present day Councillors like most "National" politicians tend not to be of the brightest. I am always wary of anyone who actually wants to be a politician. Just having that as an ambition should be enough to disqualify anyone.
No problem Snoop but I think you have the answer there, my uncle was an 'old school' councillor. I've seen some local councillors down here fight tooth an nail against out of town supermarkets because they had little corner shops and were afraid of losing revenue themselves.
-
I note my council's not on the list, yet. They're probably overdrawn instead.
Look your's up:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7660741.stm
TFL (transport für london) on the other hand has £40M under threat in Iceland eeek:
Meanwhile I've just had a major hit this morning. New business contract for next year has just been dropped as the owners of the company have decided to dismantle the venture. cry: It was all going so well ...
-
How the hell did Cornwall County Council manage to put money in there. Its only us emmits in these parts that know you dont fall off the edge of the sea when you reach the horizon? eeek:
-
How the hell did Cornwall County Council manage to put money in there. Its only us emmits in these parts that know you dont fall off the edge of the sea when you reach the horizon? eeek:
You sure?
-
That only us emmits know or that we won't fall off when we reach the horizon? I'm not sure if the Welsh are further ahead than the Cornish in that respect whistle:
-
The "Full" list of councils and other "Authorities" with money tied up in just one Icelandic bank.
Here are the councils who have so far revealed deposits in the collapsed Icelandic bank Landsbanki or its UK arm Heritable, or in other threatened Icelandic institutions:
* Kent County Council - £50 million
* Nottingham City Council - £42 million
* Norfolk County Council - £32.5 million
* Dorset County Council - £28.1 million
* Hertfordshire - £28 million
* Barnet Council- £27 million
* Somerset County Council - £25 million
* Northumberland County Council - £23 million
* Surrey County Council - £20 million
* Hillingdon Council - £20 million
* Neath Port Talbot Council - £20 million
* Westminster Council - £17 million
* Brent - £15 million
* Caerphilly County Council - £15 million.
* North Ayrshire - £15 million
* Plymouth City Council £13 million
* Havering Council - £12.5 million
* West Sussex - £12.9 million
* Breckland Council - £12 million
* Gloucestershire County Council - £12 million
* Cheltenham Borough Council - £11 million
* Lancashire County Council - £10 million
* Scottish Borders Council - £10m
* Cambridge City Council - £9 million
* Wakefield - £9 million
* West Oxfordshire District Council - £9 million
* Wyre Forest District Council - £9 million
* Cheshire County Council - £8.5 million
* Bassetlaw District Council - £8 million
* Bristol City Council - £8 million
* Daventry District Council - £8 million
* Wiltshire County Council - £8 million
* South Lanarkshire Council - £7.5 million
* Derwentside District Council - £7 million
* North East Lincolnshire Council - £7 million
* West Lindsey District Council - £7 million
* Cherwell District Council - £6.5 million
* Redcar and Cleveland Council - £6 million
* Lancaster City Council - £6 million
* Canterbury City Council - £6 million
* Ceredigion - £5.5 million
* North Lincolnshire Council - £ 5.5 million
* Sutton Council - £5.5 million
* Bracknell Forest - £5 million
* Bromley Borough Council - £5 million
* Buckinghamshire County Council - £5 million
* Stoke-on-Trent Council - £5 million
* Braintree District - £5 million
* Cornwall County Council - £5 million
* Exeter City Council - £5 million
* Ipswich Borough Council - £5 million
* Oxfordshire County Council - £5 million
* South Ayrshire - £5 million
* South Ribble - £5 million
* Wokingham Borough Council - £5 million
* Gateshead Council - £4.5 million
* Oxford City Council - £4.5 million
* Colchester Borough Council - £4 million
* East Lindsey District Council - £4 million
* East Staffordshire Borough Council - £4 million
* North Wiltshire District Council - £4 million
* Powys Council £4 million
* Restormel Borough Council - £4 million
* Rotherham Council - £3.8 million
* Flintshire Council - £3.7 million
* Aylesbury District Council - £3 million
* East Ayrshire - £3 million
* North Somerset - £3 million
* Doncaster Council - £3 million
* Nuneaton and Bedworth - £3 million
* Peterborough City Council - £3 million
* Rhondda Cynon Taff Council - £3 million
* Solihull Council - £3 million
* Stroud - £3 million
* Slough Council - £2.5 million
* South Oxfordshire District Council - £2.5 million
* Wycombe District Council - £2.5 million
* Cotswold District Council - £2 million
* Gloucester City Council - £2 million
* Great Yarmouth - £2 million
* Moray Council - £2 million
* Newark and Sherwood District Council - £2 million
* South Hams District Council - £1.25 million
* Monmouthshire Council - £1.2 million
* Mid-Devon - £1.1 million
* Charnwood Borough Council - £1 million
* Dover District Council - £1 million
* Bridgend Council - £1 million
* Bridgnorth - £1 million
* Hertsmere Borough Council - £1 million
* Kirklees Council - £1 million
* Perth and Kinross Council - £1 million
* Tewkesbury Borough Council - £1 million
* Vale of White Horse District Council - £1 million
* Winchester - £1 million
* Sevenoaks District Council - £1 million
* Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council - £1 million
* Lewes District Council - £1 million
* Burnley Council - TBC
* Chorley Council - TBC
* Wychavon District Council - TBC
Other affected bodies
* Transport For London - £40 million
* Metropolitan Police - £30 million
* Dorset Police Authority - £7 million
* Sussex Police Authority - £6.8 million
* West Yorkshire Police Authority - £6 million
* Northumbria Police Authority - £3.5 million
* Hertfordshire Police Authority - £3 million
* Gwent Police Authority - £1 million
I assume TBC (To be confirmed) means they don't actually know how much they have salted away.
-
That only us emmits know or that we won't fall off when we reach the horizon? I'm not sure if the Welsh are further ahead than the Cornish in that respect whistle:
Coming from Hampshire I was pretty certain that the civilised world ended at Bournemouth to the West, Fareham to the East and Watford to the North. Going South one simply got wet feet.
-
It now seems that the UK Government had been warned that the Icelandic Banks were heading for the rocks over two months ago and did nothing about it other than burble that everything would be alright.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7663596.stm
Broon meanwhile is angry with Iceland ~ presumably for letting him put himself in the firing line.
(https://www.virtual-pub.com/SMF/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.google.co.uk%2Furl%3Fq%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.freedomsphoenix.com%2FUploads%2FGraphics%2F001-0620171340-ShootFoot.jpg%26amp%3Busg%3DAFQjCNENFZZAc-XZ1GJZamKa9eTBwxc1VA&hash=30dc17823058192ce042ba3a5c3b28733f053af0)
-
I sent and received these today...
Subject: RE: Your enquiry
From: "Higgins Sue" <Sue.Higgins@sutton.gov.uk>
Date: Fri, October 10, 2008 5:50 pm
To: TMR
Cc: "Martin Paul" <paul.martin@sutton.gov.uk>
Priority: Normal
Options: View full header | View printable version | Add to addressbook | Block sender | Add sender to allow list
Dear Mr TMR, (with wrong spelling... ::))
I'm the Council's Director with responsibility for Finance and will reply to your
questions. I understand your dissatification with my performance and that of the
Council more generally and can assure you that we are responding to the emerging and
unprescendented world economic situation with care and vigour. That said, our
Treasury Mangement Policy (TMP) sets the terms and limits for our investments and we
only invest in institutions with an A rating or higher. These investments were made
within those boundaries. Councils have a duty to be careful with public money but
also to provide value for money for its citizens, by only investing with A, AA or
AAA rated institutions we believe we balanced risk with return appropriately.
To answer your questions more specifically, we have two investments with Heritable
Bank PLC totalling £5.5m. One sum was deposited in August and the second in
September. Heritable are a UK bank and their assets are currently frozen, as you no
doubt know, with Ernst and Young appointed as administrators. We use Sector as our
Treasury advisers and Heritable were green risk / A grade rated when we made both
deposits with them. I am clear that the deposits were made within the terms and
limits set by our Treasury Management policy and were made taking the advice of
Sector. We spread our investments to minimise risk and because Heritable were A
graded we made only relatively small and short term deposits with them, the August
deposit being for 3 months and the September one for a week. We are in contact with
the bank's administrators as you would expect.
I have undertaken a review of the circumstances around these two deposits and am
satisfied that my officers acted properly and in accordance with the parameters set
by our TMP and on Sector's advice but will be undertaking a fuller review and
reporting on this to the Council's Audit Committee at its next meeting in December.
The Council also issued a press statement as soon as we became aware of the problem
on Wednesday this week. I say both of these things to reassure you that I do take
the matter of my accountability seriously and that the Council has been and is open
to this matter being subject to public scrutiny.
Please do not hesitate to come back to me if you need anything further.
Yours sincerely,
Sue
Sue Higgins, Strategic Director - Resources
London Borough of Sutton
Civic Offices, St Nicholas Way, Sutton, Surrey SM1 1EA
Tel: +44 (020 8770 5511), Fax: +44 (020 8770 5510), web site: www.sutton.gov.uk
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Paul <Paul.Martin@sutton.gov.uk>
Sent: 10 October 2008 13:25
To: TMR
Cc: Higgins Sue
Subject: Your enquiry
Dear Mr TMR
Many thanks for your message. We will get a full response to your questions as
quickly as we can.
Regards - Paul Martin
-----Original Message-----
From: TMR
Sent: 10 October 2008 12:07
To: Martin Paul
Subject:
Dear Mr Martin,
I noticed that public money, harvested from the good citizens of Sutton by way of
Council Tax has gone missing under your watch. £5.5 Million is the sum being
reported by the press.
Can you explain to me why this investment was allowed to remain in Iceland when
alarm bells have been ringing since August 2007, about the instability of the
Icelandic Banks, and again as recently as May 2008 when these banks were being down
graded?
There is little point all the local authorities appealing to central Government for
a bailout from us the taxpayer, to replace our money as Ratepayers that your
Authority has lost in a reckless investment.
I would like a full and dated explanation from yourself and the Chief Financial
Officer within the next seven days as to the following- -
When was this investment made?
Why was it made, on whose recommedation and what independent advice was sought?
What checks were made on the credit worthiness of Landsbanki at the time?
What monitoring was made on this investment considering the warnings that were being
put out in August 2007, and the later downgrading to BBB+?
When was the Authority first aware that Landsbanki were in financial trouble and
what steps did you take to protect the ratepayers funds?
I do not wish to hear that you are making appeals to Whitehall, the officers and
Councillors are legally responsible for this money, not Whitehall. This is an
appalling state of affairs considering that the Local Authority has the right to
extract this money from our pockets with the sanction of penal action if we do not
pay and to find this level of incompetence within your Finance department.
If I do not receive a detailed explanation with seven days, who is responsible and
what disciplinary steps are going to be taken, as there most certainly would be in a
private enterprise, I will apply for this information with an application under the
Freedom of Information Act and ensure that this goes to press.
For far too long have we had to put up with this lack of accountability at all tiers
of Government. I look forward to receiving your acknowledgement and your detailed
reply.
I will also be registering an official complaint with the Standards Board
Yours sincerely,
H/T to OH.
-
Also...
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/ap/20081010/img/pbs-aptopix-britain-markets-a41a13eb43e8.html
Couldn't find it on the BBC website though...
-
Also, regarding Sutton Council...
In other news regarding this "Council", they have also decided that Beddington Park is now to bar smoking.
So now you can't smoke in a park. An open park. A fvcking huge park.
But you still will, however, ingest god knows what shite from the constant traffic on the A232 next to it.
This ban is also unenforceable under law. Any poor sod that gets the job of trying to enforce it is likely to meet with much abuse - both physical and verbal - and will end up as fish food in the Wandle.
-
Another part of this which I should like explained, is why they have such large sums salted away in the first place.
I have heard the argument that it is cash for 'contingencies' like flood emergencies.
That makes sense, except that most deposits are on fixed term of many months. rubschin:
-
(1) In terms of their revenues these are comparatively small sums of money to hold in reserve.
(2) When did you ever hear of a council that paid out promptly?
(3) With a contingency fund they would "Borrow" (using an overdraft facility) against provable assets as opposed to borrowing against anticipated future tax revenues and expect to pay a lower rate of interest ~ at least in "normal" times they could.
(3) They are no better at sums than I am ~ they just have more noughts on the end.
-
worthy:
That's why I employ an accountant. redface:
-
I don't need an accountant to tell me I am worth the square root of f*ck all surrender:
-
You dont need to be an accountant to see a flaw in this blinding plan. We are going to lend one of the Icelandic banks money so that they can pay us the money that they owe us... rubschin:
A £100m loan is being given by the Bank of England to the UK arm of the collapsed Icelandic bank Landsbanki to help repay the bank's UK creditors.
Savers with Icesave, the bank's internet operation, and any of its other UK depositors will benefit.
"This loan will help ensure an orderly wind-down of Landsbanki which will maximise the return to UK creditors," said a Bank of England spokesman.
Icesave closed last week, leaving its 300,000 UK savers without their cash.
The loan was announced in the Commons by Chancellor Alistair Darling on Monday afternoon.
Precisely how money will be channelled to those who need it is yet to be made clear, and the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) is still drawing up a plan on how savers will be compensated for their lost savings.
Earlier in the day, the chancellor said that a plan to assist business customers and savers with Landsbanki was close to being finalised.
He threatened to raise money from the bank's assets in the UK which the government has seized to help those whose accounts have been frozen for a week.
The UK Treasury said all UK savers' money was protected, even though the £100m loan would not cover the entire amount needed to compensate savers.
The issue caused a diplomatic row between the two countries' governments.
Compensation
Icesave customers in the UK are set to receive compensation for their lost savings, but part of this should come from the Icelandic authorities because the bank is not registered in the UK.
The first 20,000 euros of compensation should be provided by the Icelandic compensation scheme, with the rest coming from the UK's Financial Services Compensation Scheme.
But there has been some debate about how the Icelandic scheme will come up with this money, and how much business customers, charities or local authorities that saved with Landsbanki will get.
"Our authorities have set up an arrangement, agreed in principle, for an accelerated payout to depositors," Mr Darling told the Commons.
"We are also working with the Icelandic authorities to facilitate claims by UK charities and local authorities on their deposits held at these Icelandic banks."
The announcement came after the chancellor met the Icelandic finance minister in Washington on Sunday afternoon and pressed him for a swift resolution of the situation.
Initially, any rescue in Iceland was expected to concentrate on domestic customers first, prompting a strong reaction from the UK government, which seized the Landsbanki assets in the UK.