View more on these topics

Salmond wants FCA to investigate RBS threat to leave Scotland

Scottish first minister Alex Salmond is calling on the FCA and the police to investigate the handling of Royal Bank of Scotland’s decision to relocate to London in the event of Scottish independence.

During the final frantic days of campaigning on the referendum for Scottish independence last month, RBS said it would relocate if there was a Yes vote.

The Financial Times reports Salmond believes it had a significant impact on the campaign, which finished at 45 per cent for Yes and 55 per cent to the No camp. Salmond says Treasury officials briefed details of the state-owned bank’s move before it had been agreed by the RBS board in breach of FCA rules.

He said: “The disclosure of market-sensitive information in this way was an extremely serious breach of the rules on insider dealing and must be investigated in the proper fashion.

“The fact that the Treasury was briefing some of the media about a bank’s intentions hours before official notice to the markets and indeed during the bank’s own board meeting cannot be swept under the carpet.”

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 9 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. The voters are entitled to know all the facts before making a decision, clearly Mr Salmond does not believe in the democratic process. If rules were technically broken, the public interest was served.

    What about Standard Life and all the other businesses who said they would relocate? They all have a responsibility to consider the interests of their customers and shareholders first and are not making political judgements.

    Enough time and money has been spent on the ambitions of this would be dictator, the people have spoken and it is time to rebuild bridges and work for unity and fair governance.

  2. Should the FCA even bother to respond to this call, I expect it’ll be by way of yet another multi-million pound “independent” investigation.

  3. You lost Alex so it’s now gardening time, but please don’t try growing sour grapes.

  4. You lost Alex. Time for gardening leave, but please do not grow any more sour grapes.

  5. Yawn. Fishface is such a bad loser. The tastiest burger I’ve ever eaten in my life was the one I had at BK Manchester Airport a few weeks back while I watched him resign live on TV. Delicious!

  6. Contractually anon 13th October 2014 at 11:19 am

    If he thinks that the RBS view to leave Scotland in the event of a yes vote had such a dramatic impact on the vote itself, surely he is glad that the information was released. He wouldn’t want the Scottish voters not having relevant information would he? Maybe I’m missing something but I thought this was information that was already widely perceived to be the case based on previous statements by RBS, and was also distributed by the bank, albeit shortly after the treasury announcement.

    Besides which, an independent Scotland couldn’t afford RBS so they were doing him a favour.

    This has to be a complete non-issue?

  7. I don’t reside in Scotland so I have no thoughts either way but I think you need to re-read the article. It is not the fact that RBS said they were going to clear off he is talking about.

    “………The fact that the Treasury was briefing some of the media about a bank’s intentions hours before official notice to the markets and indeed during the bank’s own board meeting cannot be swept under the carpet.”

    My question would be why he is asking for the FCA to investigate? They don’t regulate the Treasury. If he had called for the SFO to do this I could understand.

    To MM the title of the blog is a bit misleading too. Should it not read that the treasury should be investigated over RBS disclosure to pull out?

  8. Big clue here Alex !!

    RBS = State owned bank !!!

    So do you think that a bank owned by the British people is going to stay in Scotland if it had won independence.
    From what I hear a lot of Scottish companies were to up sticks and move south if it was a yes vote !!

  9. Salmond is right to take issue if officials who abused their powers to influence a decision in their favour, why should this be acceptable??
    Years later we still hear about LIBOR rigging at banks and the regulator, whats the difference? I believe that persons should be held accountable for their actions, even after the fact. There would be far less crooks and abuses of position if so called informed people held a more holistic and long term view of rules and proper applications. Sheepish attitudes from sheepish minds!
    Cameron could say sorry and that should be OK, just like Fred the Shred and all the other morally corrupt assholes who continue to laugh at a spineless gullible public, more of the same please….we are British after all!

Leave a comment

Close

Why register with Money Marketing ?

Providing trusted insight for professional advisers.  Since 1985 Money Marketing has helped promote and analyse the financial adviser community in the UK and continues to be the trusted industry brand for independent insight and advice.

News & analysis delivered directly to your inbox
Register today to receive our range of news alerts including daily and weekly briefings

Money Marketing Events
Be the first to hear about our industry leading conferences, awards, roundtables and more.

Research and insight
Take part in and see the results of Money Marketing's flagship investigations into industry trends.

Have your say
Only registered users can post comments. As the voice of the adviser community, our content generates robust debate. Sign up today and make your voice heard.

Register now

Having problems?

Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3712

Lines are open Monday to Friday 9:00am -5.00pm

Email: customerservices@moneymarketing.com