Three cheers for the Manx Herald. This article does not need our comments!

  • follow_the_tao
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
Posted: Fri, 13/02/2009 - 06:54

What more could we ask for? I think we just thank-you and ask if the Herald editor has any more good ideas.

This is the link to the story, which I've copied below:


Chief Minister accused of participating in PR ‘disaster’
11 February, 2009 05:15:00 Herald Editor
Font size: Decrease font Enlarge font

Perhaps Mr Brown thought the Treasury Committee was laying a trap for him when he was given the advice that the IOM may have a very good case against the FSA: is that why he didn’t take it?

Chief Minister, Tony Brown was so accused by Liberal Vannin Party leader, Peter Karran in yesterday’s (Tuesday 10th Feb) sitting of the House of Keys.

Mr Brown was answering supplementary questions to a Question from Michael MHK, David Cannan, who inquired what implications there are for the Island following on from the IOM delegation’s appearance before the UK House of Commons, Treasury Select Committee on 3rd February.

Mr Karran wanted to know what action is going to be taken “to try to minimize the bad PR” that came about from the visit.

Mr Brown’s response was the only bad PR came from some of the KSF (IOM) depositors “who have a different interest to my interest”. He went on to say his interest covers both that of the depositors and the whole of the IOM.

Whilst the political ‘posturing’ by Mr Brown, in both Keys and in Westminster, may have been designed to ‘protect’ the ‘independence’ of the IOM, it has done little to placate the, growingly disgruntled, ‘victims’ of the second ‘Cod War’ - the depositors of KSF (IOM) - and an increasing number of concerned IOM taxpayers who stand to ‘lose’ £50 million upwards.

The Manx Herald has received a number of emails, in response to the Chief Minister’s comments, and typifying the content is one from the KSF (IOM) depositors’ action group - about the ‘Blame Game’ being played - in which they say:

“Is it the Financial Services Authority (FSA) who at best 'encouraged' the FSC and the directors of KSFIOM to move £550m of deposits to KSFUK? Placing almost 50% of a bank's assets in one place is clearly not normal practice for any financial institution employing effective risk management practices, but doing so without any ring-fencing or protection of any kind is bordering on madness.

Is it the Financial Services Commission (FSC) who relied solely on past practice and a vague memorandum of understanding when moving the money to London? Quote John Aspden at the Treasury Select Committee on 3 February 2009 "…if all the understandings that we had [with FSA] had been adhered to I would not have thought that the London bank would be in quite the predicament that it appears to be." These understandings are apparently expressed in a yet to be seen exchange of letters with the FSA. So the FSC believes the fault lies with the FSA?

Is it the directors of KSFIOM who chose to follow the advice of the FSA and the FSC and move almost half of the bank's assets to London? Paul Myners, Minister for the City at HM Treasury now comments on this in writing by saying "KSF IOM…could have chosen to put its money elsewhere and to have diversified the deposits it made rather than making a single large deposit, which concentrated the credit risk to which it was exposed." So HM Treasury blames the KSFIOM directors?

Is it the Isle of Man Government who still insists [quote Tony Brown, Chief Minister at the TSC] that "we are a well-regulated transparent jurisdiction. People who put their deposits there should be aware that there is a compensation scheme and that has served us well, and our commitment to do the best for the depositors is well-known"? Try telling that to the KSFIOM depositors. Well-regulated and transparent would not be the first adjectives to come to mind.

So there we have it…

Two governments;

Two regulatory organisations;

Some massive unforgivable mistakes;

But no one taking responsibility;

Everyone playing the blame game.

At the Treasury Select Committee Tony Brown was asked three times whether KSFIOM depositors should seek redress from the UK Government. Three times he chose to avoid a straight answer, eventually saying that "As far as the situation for the Isle of Man is concerned, we are accepting our responsibilities and endeavouring to rectify the situation."

It's time that the four parties in this financial drama do just that - accept their responsibilities and rectify the situation by funding 100% return of monies to depositors. Otherwise it looks like it's going to be a long and painful legal process for everyone, a process that may be forced to start by examining the actions of the authorities in the Isle of Man.”

Clearly the ‘retail’ depositors are right to feel ‘stitched-up’ by the actions/inactions of UK and IOM authorities and want to see all their money being returned; but it is the IOM taxpayers, who stand to foot a large part of the bill in clearing up this mess, who perhaps should be feeling most aggrieved.

Whether it was a case of regulatory failure, incompetence, negligence or a combination of these, or other, factors, if the UK authorities are believed to have some culpability in the IOM’s predicament, then the Chief Minister should have had the guts to say it to their face and not just behind their backs back in the (relative) safety of his offices.

Perhaps Mr Brown thought the Treasury Committee was laying a trap for him when he was given the advice that the IOM may have a very good case against the FSA: is that why he didn’t take it?
How or why did he think, by saying yes, it would make any significant difference to the relations between the IOM and the UK? Is it because he really is convinced the UK might send a gunboat or two?

Your rating: None Average: 5 (43 votes)

Comment viewing options
Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Three Cheers

  • banditman
  • 21/01/09 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 13/02/2009 - 20:27

Wel done london team.

Does the Manx Herald not have a big brother national that might like to run with the story in the finacial pages?

Not a coincidence!

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Fri, 13/02/2009 - 09:09

Just so you don't think it's a coincidence..
see DAG press release:

Thanks to the Manx Herald for picking it up!

We Are Proud of You

  • jkk
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 13/02/2009 - 12:25

For the first time in four months I can candidly say, well done, London Team, thank you. We are proud of you.

The only question that remains is why it took you so long. Is it because some obstructing factor got finally flushed out of the system?

Congratultions to the London Team

  • Lucky Jim
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 13/02/2009 - 11:25

The article is entirely due to the hard work of sleeplessnight & Co., on the London team. CONGRATULTIONS!


  • worried jules
  • 13/10/08 14/06/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 13/02/2009 - 12:24

this is an awesome article - tks london team and its wonderful that th emanx herald have picked it up!! i have a smile on my face at last!!!!

Manx Herald

  • brokemanx
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Fri, 13/02/2009 - 20:09

This is an online 'newspaper' and has no 'paper version'. As such it is not widely known about or read on the Isle of Man. So, unfortunately, this excellent analytical article is unlikely to have much effect here on the island. I have pointed people I know to the website.

It would be useful if this appeared in one of the three main island papers, but these are all owned by Johnston Press, which is alleged to have agreements with local politicians to not publish anything critical of the government in return for lucrative government advertising revenue.

Johnston Press in IOM

  • Lucky Jim
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 13/02/2009 - 21:54

Johnston Press own the IOM's Courrier, Independent & Examiner papers & the IoMToday on-line Paper, the latter being very supportive of our campaign.

brokemanx -- could you tell us if what is published in the on-line paper gets published in the others ?

Local Press Coverage

  • brokemanx
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Fri, 13/02/2009 - 23:00

Only a few edited comments from the on-line discussions get quoted in print. The main articles on-line and in print contain the same information. The Manx Herald has no print version and is unconnected to the Johnson Press papers. Coverage has become more detailed lately and mentions depositors' criticism of the government and Chief Minister more in recent issues. However, in general, the local papers are not openly critical of the government and do not lead political campaigns. They have more coverage of local social events as they are local not national papers. Each title is only published weekly (3 papers: 2, Examiner & Independent, are sold and 1 is a free 'advertising' paper). The UK papers are more important for 'national' news coverage.