bishbashbosh Posted February 3, 2009 Share Posted February 3, 2009 It's a delicate balancing act to be sure - we don't want to appear to be unable to cope with events or to be going to the UK cap in hand. That said, thie quotes provided don't show a very powerful or robust demonstration of the fact that everyone's money from KSF (IOM) is sat in the UK and that it's all thanks to the UK Government freezing the UK subsidiary's assets? http://www.manxradio.com/readNEwsItem.aspx?id=32436 Will have to wait for the details to be published to see more of what was said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
%age Posted February 3, 2009 Share Posted February 3, 2009 As mentioned in another thread, the video of the day's proceedings is here click Our lot take centre stage at about 1:32:00. It is worth watching. One of the later interrogators, amongst his questioning method of employing an irritatingly forced amicable laugh (in the way that a snake does before it devours its prey) calls our Chief Minister Tony Martin. Make of that what you will. Anyway, it is all worth seeing how our little fish react in a big pond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
%age Posted February 3, 2009 Share Posted February 3, 2009 2:08:45 "what about taking legal action against the FSA" This section says an awful lot about the relationship the UK has with the IoM. 2:23:55 (To Tony Brown) Would you in the future like to see a common depositor protection UK wide. That sort of question does not look good for the Isle of Man's independence. My take on all this is that the UK holds all the cards if not all the money. At least some, if not all of it will be filtered back to the Isle of Man but at a price . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tempus Fugit Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 I think on the bit about sending the navy to retake the Island (in the North Sea !), TB missed a hit where he could have said that we would call upon the UK government who we pay for our defence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freggyragh Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 I thought our representatives did as good a job as they could there, given the circumstances. The UK reps came across as a bunch of toots. Is that the best they have? They didn't seem to understand the issues very well, or was that on purpose? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
%age Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 After watching the video, I think that Tony Brown should have stood up and told the fucken lorra them to fuck off with their prodding questions, as he is a Minister, a Chief one at that and they are just piddling MPs. And as for calling him Tony Martin and thinking the Isle of Man is in the North Sea, he should have told 'em what fuckwits they is. Some people have no respect anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Fighting our corner: "You're a big man Tony...but you're out of shape." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
localyokel Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 2:23:55(To Tony Brown) Would you in the future like to see a common depositor protection UK wide. Did he say "yes" and then point out that the IOM is not in the UK and so what was the point of the frigging question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triskelion Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 I think our Tone did well not to rise to a lot of the ignorance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
localyokel Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 I think our Tone did well not to rise to a lot of the ignorance. It shows what they really think though doesn't it? They think that we're just a bunch of hicks who have been shafted by a country bigger and more influential than we are and that we lack the clout and the intelligence to do anything about it. All this is a sham at the end of the day the dignified thing to do was not turn up and listen to what amounts to school yard bullying by a bunch of w@nkers who have got away with the theft of half a billion pounds from a country that won't fight back. Its a bit like having your dinner money nicked by the school bully and then watching him go to the shop and spend it for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 I feel Tony really missed the opportunity to throw a punch when they raised the UK gov bailing out an IOM bank. His answer rejecting any involvement by the UK government was, I feel, the standard consitutional and political answer any Manx Nationalist would make - and you could hear from the murmurs from the deposit holder lobby groups that they weren't happy about him rejecting what they saw as a way to get their money back. I feel he could have taken the conversation along a different path. Firstly a compensation program isn't the primary issue in this case - one of the reasons KSF (IOM) is still in trouble is the fact the UK has siezed its assets. I feel Brown should have strongly made that point - it was the UKs actions to mitigate its losses that have created the losses for the IOM. By taking seizing the assets the UK government has some responsibility for the IOM depositors - if it hadn't acted the money would have gone to Iceland and the UK government would be constitutionally bound to represent us in working to get it back. By their own actions they have abdicated that responsibility and got hold of the cash for their own interests. Secondly there is no particular reason why deposit protection schemes should be nationally based - ie the IOM doesn't need to see itself as being bailed out by the UK. In fact, as long as regulatory regimes are reasonably harmonized to stop freeloading, spreading the risk as widely as possible is good. A Pan-national scheme independent of any particular soverignty, with oversight and monitoring of regulatory development in its respective member's banking systems isn't a totally rediculous suggestion. Such a body wouldn't trump the FSC, but would independently asses its risks based on pooled risk sharing. There's the council of the Isles or whatever it is linking Eire IOM, Channel Isles, UK - by thinking out of the box the IOM could have seen a way to protect its soverignty, but enhance its openness and regulatory oversight. His answer gave the impression of a us little islanders saying we could stand on our two feet without the UK - fine, but then there was nowhere else for the conversation to go. If he'd instead made it clear that the UK has responsibilities to the IOM for its actions in this mess and offered pan-national suggestions for how to improve the Island's financial stability the conversation could have moved on in a far more open way without exposing the Island's weaknesses. A missed opportunity Tony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishbashbosh Posted February 4, 2009 Author Share Posted February 4, 2009 I feel Tony really missed the opportunity to throw a punch when they raised the UK gov bailing out an IOM bank. His answer rejecting any involvement by the UK government was, I feel, the standard consitutional and political answer any Manx Nationalist would make - and you could hear from the murmurs from the deposit holder lobby groups that they weren't happy about him rejecting what they saw as a way to get their money back. I feel he could have taken the conversation along a different path. Firstly a compensation program isn't the primary issue in this case - one of the reasons KSF (IOM) is still in trouble is the fact the UK has siezed its assets. I feel Brown should have strongly made that point - it was the UKs actions to mitigate its losses that have created the losses for the IOM. By taking seizing the assets the UK government has some responsibility for the IOM depositors - if it hadn't acted the money would have gone to Iceland and the UK government would be constitutionally bound to represent us in working to get it back. By their own actions they have abdicated that responsibility and got hold of the cash for their own interests. Secondly there is no particular reason why deposit protection schemes should be nationally based - ie the IOM doesn't need to see itself as being bailed out by the UK. In fact, as long as regulatory regimes are reasonably harmonized to stop freeloading, spreading the risk as widely as possible is good. A Pan-national scheme independent of any particular soverignty, with oversight and monitoring of regulatory development in its respective member's banking systems isn't a totally rediculous suggestion. Such a body wouldn't trump the FSC, but would independently asses its risks based on pooled risk sharing. There's the council of the Isles or whatever it is linking Eire IOM, Channel Isles, UK - by thinking out of the box the IOM could have seen a way to protect its soverignty, but enhance its openness and regulatory oversight. His answer gave the impression of a us little islanders saying we could stand on our two feet without the UK - fine, but then there was nowhere else for the conversation to go. If he'd instead made it clear that the UK has responsibilities to the IOM for its actions in this mess and offered pan-national suggestions for how to improve the Island's financial stability the conversation could have moved on in a far more open way without exposing the Island's weaknesses. A missed opportunity Tony. Good post Chinahand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tempus Fugit Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 the UK just doesn't get the point made over and over again that depositors CANNOT open UK accounts without a uk address, yet feel they are being deprived of tax on income on the (currently a pittance because of their bank rate) interest earned. The solution to that is in their own hands, if they want worldwide depositors in uk banks they have to change THEIR procedures, not whinge threaten and scheme and call names to other countries they feel are reaping their harvest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebrof Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 the UK just doesn't get the point made over and over again that depositors CANNOT open UK accounts without a uk address, yet feel they are being deprived of tax on income on the (currently a pittance because of their bank rate) interest earned. The solution to that is in their own hands, if they want worldwide depositors in uk banks they have to change THEIR procedures, not whinge threaten and scheme and call names to other countries they feel are reaping their harvest I don't think this is the point. The UK has no right to tax the offshore investment income of people resident abroad. What the UK is concerned about is the investments held in the IOM by UK residents, the income from which is taxable in the UK. However, if the UK authorities don't know about it, they can't tax it. This is what bugs them. Furthermore, I don't think it has been demonstrated that the UK government is preventing overseas residents from opening accounts in the UK. It's the banks who are the problem. They can't be bothered. And why? Because there isn't much demand. Most people want to keep their stash as far away from the prying eyes of HMRC as possible. S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pragmatopian Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 the UK just doesn't get the point made over and over again that depositors CANNOT open UK accounts without a uk address, yet feel they are being deprived of tax on income on the (currently a pittance because of their bank rate) interest earned. The solution to that is in their own hands, if they want worldwide depositors in uk banks they have to change THEIR procedures, not whinge threaten and scheme and call names to other countries they feel are reaping their harvest Don't think that can be right. I just opened a UK deposit account and I don't have a UK address. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.