Comments on: Part II : Credit Institutions (Financial Support) Bill 2008 http://www.xlml.com/aehso/2008/10/02/part-ii-credit-institutions-financial-support-bill-2008/ John O'Shea's musings, observations and opinions on anything and everything. Wed, 10 Aug 2011 18:49:41 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Paul Browne http://www.xlml.com/aehso/2008/10/02/part-ii-credit-institutions-financial-support-bill-2008/comment-page-1/#comment-267399 Paul Browne Tue, 14 Oct 2008 10:12:56 +0000 http://www.xlml.com/aehso/?p=455#comment-267399 Glad to see that I'm not the only one skeptical about the 'its only a guarantee' line. http://www.firstpartners.net/blog/business/government/2008/10/01/nationalisation_of_irishbanks/ Paul Glad to see that I’m not the only one skeptical about the ‘its only a guarantee’ line.

http://www.firstpartners.net/blog/business/government/2008/10/01/nationalisation_of_irishbanks/

Paul

]]> By: aman http://www.xlml.com/aehso/2008/10/02/part-ii-credit-institutions-financial-support-bill-2008/comment-page-1/#comment-258416 aman Thu, 02 Oct 2008 10:00:00 +0000 http://www.xlml.com/aehso/?p=455#comment-258416 the worrying things about this guarantee is the amount -- double GDP. It is more in dollar terms than what the From a competition perspective this gives a bias towards Irish Banks in the local market (AIB, BoI, etc will have these guarantees but HBOS, Ulster Bank, etc won't) but the Irish Taxpayer will be asked to cover foreign deposits too. Both AIB and BoI have a presence in the UK (both in Northern Ireland but also England/Wales/Scotland). If the reported news stories turn out to be true, there will be a large well of UK deposits flowing to these Irish banks. Is this something intended as a way to get hold of foreign currency? Or an unseen consequence. Does this have anything to do with the rumours that <a href="http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/businessnews/Santander-stays-silent-over-Bank.4512024.jp" rel="nofollow">Satander were going to approach Bank Of Ireland</a>, but these were <a href="http://www.iht.com/articles/reuters/2008/09/19/business/OUKBS-UK-SANTANDER-BUYS-IREAND.php" rel="nofollow">dismissed</a>. It seems odd that the taxpayer if covering the debts of the banks with no equity or upside, but really governments should not be in business of covering banks with bad business models, as the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_7645000/7645676.stm" rel="nofollow"> former chairman and ceo of lloydstsb, Brian Pitman, said in an interview recently</a>. but then again, what do I know? the worrying things about this guarantee is the amount — double GDP. It is more in dollar terms than what the

From a competition perspective this gives a bias towards Irish Banks in the local market (AIB, BoI, etc will have these guarantees but HBOS, Ulster Bank, etc won’t) but the Irish Taxpayer will be asked to cover foreign deposits too. Both AIB and BoI have a presence in the UK (both in Northern Ireland but also England/Wales/Scotland). If the reported news stories turn out to be true, there will be a large well of UK deposits flowing to these Irish banks. Is this something intended as a way to get hold of foreign currency? Or an unseen consequence.

Does this have anything to do with the rumours that Satander were going to approach Bank Of Ireland, but these were dismissed.

It seems odd that the taxpayer if covering the debts of the banks with no equity or upside, but really governments should not be in business of covering banks with bad business models, as the former chairman and ceo of lloydstsb, Brian Pitman, said in an interview recently.

but then again, what do I know?

]]>