Dodgyness at Icelandic Banks

Count_Dante

Wikileaks has some interesting info regarding the Icelandic banks:
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Financial_collapse:_Confidential_exposure_analysis_of_205_companies_each_owing_above_EUR45M_to_Icelandic_bank_Kaupthing%2C_26_Sep_2008

With more background info:
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Iceland_court_lifts_gag_order_after_public_outrage
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Serious_Fraud_Office_intensifies_Icelandic_banking_inquiry_after_Kaupthing_leak
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Fraud_expert_damns_EU%2C_IMF_over_Icelandic_collapse

In particular, the last link has some interesting info commentary:

Mr Brown is wrong when he says that he and his government have no responsibility in the matter. Firstly, Mr Brown has a moral responsibility, having been one of the main proponents of this model which we can now see has gone up the spout. But he also has a responsibility in the sense that he cannot really hide behind the legal status of Icesave – which made it formally dependent on the Icelandic banking authorities – and say that the UK had neither the means nor the legitimacy to supervise its activities. Could anyone realistically think that a handful of people in Reykjavik could effectively control the activities of a bank in the heart of the City? Moreover, it should be noted that the European directives concerning financial conglomerates seem to suggest that EU member states that allow such establishments into their territories from third countries must ensure that they are subject to the same level of control by the authorities of the country of origin as that provided for by European legislation. So, was there perhaps a failure on the part of the British authorities on this point, which would not be particularly surprising considering the ‘performance’ of other English banks (which were in no way related to Iceland) during the financial crisis? If so, Mr Brown’s activism in relation to this small country might be motivated by a wish to appear powerful in the eyes of his electorate and taxpayers, whose own losses cannot be played down. Of course, the Icelandic institutions have a great deal of responsibility in this matter. But does that necessarily mean that the – also considerable – responsibility of the British authorities should be overlooked, dumping it all on the Icelandic people alone?

I personally find it a complete mystery that the UK allowed deposits into Icelandic banks after, say, the end of 2007. They must have known something was up. There is 'soft touch regulation', and there is allowing people to transfer money to what amounted to Scandanavian 419 scams. For example, the always interesting Michael Lewis had this article about Iceland in April's Vanity Fair, in which a number of economists and bankers expressed strong doubts about the Icelandic banking system long before they collapsed:
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2009/04/iceland200904

What an almighty fustercluck.

nearlynew

Excellent article from vanity fair.

Unbelievable tales of greed and stupidity.


And I love the bit about the aluminium company having to pay to have their new site declared
"elf - free"

magic.