PRESS RELEASE FROM THE CENTRAL BANK OF ICELAND:
Ingimundur Fridriksson Governor of the Central Bank of Iceland has prepared a paper about the banking crisis in Iceland in 2008.
The paper was prepared for a seminar which was scheduled in the Bank of Finland on February 6, 2009.
Read the paper here.
Somewhat premature, but there’s nothing like good gossip.
Ingimundur Friðriksson man of honour and great experience and competence
. . . which must be why he’s currently (allegedly!) in the frame as one of the “dirty dozen”, as Alda calls them (i.e. one of the 12 people who “are believed to be guilty of gross negligence or misconduct in their duties, and/or criminal activity” in the Black Report):
http://icelandweatherreport.com/2010/02/the-dirty-dozen.html
Without knowing for sure, this newsfrettir article is probably talking about the collateral involved in the Landsbanki margin call:
http://newsfrettir.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=572:left-with-icelandic-bonds&catid=20:general&Itemid=42
I think this is the one you were after:
https://www.icenews.is/index.php/2009/02/13/former-icelandic-pm-haarde-on-hardtalk/#comment-65597
I don’t recall you explaining why the ECB shouldn’t have exercised its margin call, which IIRC was the core of your EU vs. Kaupthing argument. If Kaupthing owed the ECB money secured on assets and if those assets had fallen in value, then they’d be perfectly entitled to exercise their right.
Here is what I were looking for,
https://www.icenews.is/index.php/2009/02/16/kaupthing-sweden-sold-to-finns/#comment-65175
It is like maze where have to jump over walls few times to try and find thing. Search feature at IceNews here not work as it should.
>tried to kill the good, honest, strong Icelandic banks?
Kaupthing is the one that I have post much about and one that the EU memberstate not like. Word strong applies to it.
But we can of course debate about “good and honest” on a number of banks not just Icelandic one but including “good, honest”, weak bank like RBS of UK, LLoyds of UK, and “good, honest, strong” UBS of Swiss, let alone this other US banks of infamy of 2007– 2008 collasping.
I am beginning to lose link to where we discuss thing before but here are two that think link across to rest ok.
https://www.icenews.is/index.php/2009/03/16/kaupthing-uk-legal-case-makes-high-court-progress/#comment-69220
https://www.icenews.is/index.php/2009/04/13/pm-writes-to-gordon-brown-following-uk-treasury-committe-report-on-banking-crisis/#comment-72282
So let’s get this right. You still stand by the theory that the horrible ECB deliberately tried to kill the good, honest, strong Icelandic banks? They failed so the UK, who aren’t in the Euro but who no doubt agreed with the ECB that Iceland needed taking down, finished the pure Icelanders off.
That sort of story starts, “Once upon a time . . .” :D
I’m not sure how any of this is in the interests of the EU banks. I’ve not seen anything anywhere that suggests that they’ll recover 100% of what they had tied up in Iceland. Even worse for them, there’s a chance that some of the assets that secure loans that Kaupthing and Landsbanki made will be nationalised out from under them. Not an enviable position.
One note that I want make clear — after Niels of Holland posting — in other threads.
That I not say that Holland and Germany act ungentelmenly towards Iceland banks — like horrible actions of Brown-Darling — but that it is the ECB that did on behalf of EU memberstates which includes interests of those.
Specifically not EEA banks but intrerests of EU banks.
Ingimundur Friðriksson man of honour and great experience and competence — now pushed out of Central Bank early by bullying of Jóhanna and fellow political animals– puts many things into some context.
Bear in mind Ingimundur is pretty much most unpolitical and just professional man doing job.
Regarldess of this which shows incompetence of current Red Green coalition in pushing him out.
Also why is some important facts not getting more widespread attention? They scream out of page at reader who has thought about whys of situation.
This report written and released February 6th for gods sakes. It is now 14th February!
Is it because Steingrímur as so clueless now in his role of Ministry of Finance — that crazy appointment of century — to understand significance of this report from Ingimundur
And because of course this does not want attention from pro EU of Social Democrats because it shows EU operating as normal. That way is not the way Icelandic people expect. Of course.
Interesting facts about European Central Bank and other memberstate trying to kill Kaupthing and leser degree Landsbanki but mostly failing to do so — Kaupthing was strong — it took freezing order of UK on KSF in end to do it in — cant of course survive that.
(This is what make Willem Buier report looks so stupid about Iceland needing EU — banks had access to what he said through subsidiaries already. This shows what happens in EU is that it is all about It is all about memberstates by population size and their national interest they just dont play fair at this Federal level.)
Before that attack action of UK in taking KSF bank in UK from Kauthpgin, memberstate and ECB tried to kill Kaupthing at least twice but didn’t succeed.
Without final UK action pretty clear Kaupthing would surive even with those attacks — and with help of EUR 500 million loan from Iceland Central Bank.
Honestly it is hard not find only explanation as jealousy for actions by ECB and memberstate — including UK Holland Germany — and trying to protect own local banks. Instead of amending single market legislation they instead use dirty tricks against Kaupthing.
From page 10 to 11:
“For several years, the Central Bank of Iceland’s rules on liquidity
facilities have been largely modelled on those of the ECB. I say
largely because for quite a while the Icelandic rules were rather more
stringent than those in Europe – that is, the Central Bank of Iceland set
stricter requirements concerning eligibility of collateral. Facilities in
the Central Bank of Iceland resembled those in the ECB’s jurisdiction;
the collateral accepted was similar, and so on. This applied, among
other things, to bonds issued by banks. Last year, steps were taken to
align the Icelandic rules more closely with those in Europe in order to
increase access to liquidity.
In 2008, the European Central Bank responded sharply to what it
considered excessive borrowing from the ECB by Icelandic banks
through subsidiaries in EMU countries. The loans concerned had been
taken in compliance with the ECB’s rules on liquidity facilities for
financial undertakings in EMU countries, but the ECB demanded that
the Icelandic banks repay, quite quickly, a large share of the facilities
of which they had availed themselves in good faith. Those repayments were funded at least partially with deposit accumulation in foreign branches.
Early in October, two Icelandic banks received sizeable
margin calls from the ECB. The ECB demanded that they be met
immediately, which would have driven the banks to collapse. The
news of these margin calls spread widely. For reasons that were not
explained, the ECB withdrew the margin calls at the last moment, in
spite of the fact that the Central Bank of Iceland had been informed
that such decisions by the ECB were irrevocable.”