Newsbot Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Money the Isle of Man government has in an Icelandic bank may have to be written off, it is feared. Source : http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/world/...man/7677615.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 It sounds like the IOM Government did not take note of the numerous cautions that have been sounded about the Icelandic banking system over the last 12 months. Whilst a number of UK councils were still investing there Brighton & Hove Council for example decided 12 months ago not to deposit funds in Iceland due to the unacceptable risk involved. It is a shame that there was not some coordinated information flow. I wonder who was advising them? Ah well - wise after the event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keyboarder Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Seems a tad curious that our government should be investing in a rival's banking system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee54 Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Alan Bell says the £2.7million is not a great sum of money, what planet is he on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Lots of mixed messages on this at the moment. I listened to Alan Bell yesterday on Talking Heads (he is on again at 12pm tomorrow before the Moanin Line) - and he said basically that the money was tied up by the UK, Iceland is being encouraged to join the EU which would be more likely to ensure the debt was paid as the UK etc. would otherwise reject them. Things sounded quite positive, with the government money still classed as 'at risk' i.e. not yet 'gone'. He also said the bank was still in business, though not operating. Unless things have changed in 24 hours, they really need to get their act together on this and issue a definitive statement, which IMO should come from Alan Bell. Strong informed leadership on this issue is critical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebrof Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Lots of mixed messages on this at the moment. I listened to Alan Bell yesterday on Talking Heads (he is on again at 12pm tomorrow before the Moanin Line) - and he said basically that the money was tied up by the UK, Iceland is being encouraged to join the EU which would be more likely to ensure the debt was paid as the UK etc. would otherwise reject them. Things sounded quite positive, with the government money still classed as 'at risk' i.e. not yet 'gone'. He also said the bank was still in business, though not operating. Unless things have changed in 24 hours, they really need to get their act together on this and issue a definitive statement, which IMO should come from Alan Bell. Strong informed leadership on this issue is critical. I don't know what you expect Alan Bell to say in the next twenty four hours. He is completely in the hands of the British goverment. He will probably read the final outcome on Robert Peston's blog. But I do believe it is too early to write the money off. GB seized all the UK assets of the bank, and they could be considerable. After all, that action is allegedly what brought the bank down. It's wait and see time for all of us, including Mr Bell. S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluemonday Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001. Actually used were laws were from the Crime section of that bill. Legal? Perhaps JW might like to offer an opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Git Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 GB seized all the UK assets of the bank Anyone know how / why / what aspect of UK anti terrorism laws GB used to seize the money and how legal the action was if tested in court? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee54 Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 The UK are desperate to re negotiate the fishing restrictions to UK boats in Iceland's waters, and its worth £millions annually to the UK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevster Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Alan Bell says the £2.7million is not a great sum of money, what planet is he on. To you, me, and most other people it is a lot of money. When dealing with government finances though, it's not a great deal. It roughly equals 4 days of the DHSS annual budget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001. Actually used were laws were from the Crime section of that bill. Legal? Perhaps JW might like to offer an opinion. Iceland accepted a bail out from the Russian government. Apparently the Russians want to build an air base in Iceland within striking distance of the USA! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebrof Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001. Actually used were laws were from the Crime section of that bill. Legal? Perhaps JW might like to offer an opinion. Act illegally now, apologise later. That's Labour's way. Well, perhaps not the second bit. Gb's thinking was perhaps that the end justifies the means. I am quite sure the law was abused. S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee54 Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Alan Bell says the £2.7million is not a great sum of money, what planet is he on. To you, me, and most other people it is a lot of money. When dealing with government finances though, it's not a great deal. It roughly equals 4 days of the DHSS annual budget. or an extra £5 pw for the islands pensioners Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LQQ Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 The trouble with the Anti-Terror laws is that usage is not restricted. There were cases last year where a council was using anti-terror laws to spy on parents to make sure they really lived in a school catchment area. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-...ily-807873.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Woo Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 http://www.ksfiomdepositors.netgenius.co.uk/?q=node/318 Alans remark on Manx Radio that the £2.7m the Government itself had invested in the bank was not a huge amount in relation to its budget had been said in response to a caller asking if the loss would mean increased taxes on the island. It was not intended to mean that the Government had resigned itself to the loss, but only to reassure residents that taxes would not need to be increased. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.