Does it matter if Scotland's financial institutions remain independent?
First HBOS, now the Dunfermline.
The used new powers under the Banking Act to rush through a deal and prevent Scotland's largest building society from going bust. And so, as the ´óÏó´«Ã½'s Robert Peston was first to reveal this morning, the will take on the 's branches, good loans and deposits. The Treasury will take £1bn of commercial property lending and acquired mortgage debt.
The Chancellor Alistair Darling says the Dunfermline would have needed between £60m and £100m to keep it going because of its exposure to risky assets and the says full nationalisation of Dunfermline wouldn't have provided "value for money".
But the Dunfermline's chairman, Jim Faulds, disputes those figures and was furious when he spoke on ´óÏó´«Ã½ One's Politics Show Scotland yesterday (the interview is 35 mins into the programme on the iPlayer link), accusing the Treasury of "sacrificing" the business.
The Nationwide says it's "in a unique position by virtue of its size and financial strength, to provide support to Dunfermline." It expects to retain the 245 who work in Dunfermline's branches (though 289 head office jobs aren't so certain), and has said that the 140-year-old brand will remain intact.
So, as we discussed on today's Morning Extra: Does it matter if the Dunfermline remains independent? Or is this a bad deal for Scotland? Continue the debate by posting your comments below — and do read Peston's blog entry on "How Dunfermline fell" for more analysis.
Comments
or to comment.