Bringing Brown to Account

The murk surrounding the takeover of HBOS by Lloyds and the close involvement of the Prime Minister and his henchman and media fixers (upon which I first commented here) had some more light thrown upon it yesterday. The following quotes come from Jeff Randall's column in the Daily Telegraph this morning, linked here: ....onlookers discovered that Michael Fallon MP (Conservative, Sevenoaks) suspects that John Kingman, the government official who now heads UK Financial Investments, the body created to oversee state shareholdings in commercial banks, was the source of Robert Peston's BBC scoop about the banks' pleas to Downing Street for emergency assistance. Mr Kingman and Mr Peston used to work together at the Financial Times.

This allegation, made in the form of a question to Mr Peston (which Mr Fallon knew very well would not be answered), is a serious one. It invites us to infer that ministers deliberately weakened the banks' bargaining position by leaking details which would provoke sharp falls in their share prices. In effect, far from shoring up confidence in the banks, the Government plotted to ensure that it could take control without unseemly resistance.

We should hear more on this next week, when the committee questions Sir Fred Goodwin, the former chief executive of Royal Bank of Scotland, Andy Hornby, his counterpart at HBOS, and their respective chairmen, Sir Tom McKillop and Lord Stevenson. A former director of HBOS told me that his board was disgusted by the way Mr Kingman had behaved.

Perhaps it's time for the committee's chairman, John McFall, to cast some light on the murk by summoning Mr Kingman to face questions. I don't see why not. Mr Kingman is one of the most influential figures in British financial services, looking after many billions of taxpayers' funds. More than most, he knows where the bodies are buried. Yet, beyond a narrow group of Treasury and banking insiders, very few people would recognise him.

(Blog editor's highlight).

A particularly pertinent point from my 18th September posting remains unanswered to this day: Last final point - why were the share dealings in HBOS not suspended yesterday, were the politicians or their political parties not somehow, or somewhere not making a killing from their closeness to the negotiations? Doesn't that very question highlight the real issue, who can trust these remote individuals.