Banks were protected because they finance everything else and use everyone’s money to do so.
Liberty Steel wants to appeal to be a strategic UK asset on the basis of metal production in war may be a reason for the govt to keep it going, else they will close plants.
Hang on, is Greensill the bank that was giving loans to itself (or to entities belonging to its controlling parties)?
Edit: The BBC article says Liberty Steel is in danger because it's bank is in difficulties. But when you look at coverage of the bank, it's in danger because Liberty Steel et all are in difficulties.
Edit: The BBC article says Liberty Steel is in danger because it's bank is in difficulties. But when you look at coverage of the bank, it's in danger because Liberty Steel et all are in difficulties.
As they say, if you owe the bank ?100, it's your problem, if you owe the bank ?100m, it's their problem. Adjusted for inflation, of course.
Anyway, assuming you can still access it with free registration, I highly recommend going through FT Alphaville's archives on Greensill and Liberty/GFG. They've been digging into it for years.
I do wish someone on the committee would ask Cameron why ex-prime ministers, or for that matter ministers, should be allowed to do lobbying at all. There's an awful lot of stuff about what he knew when, which seems to be missing the point.
Talk about going off topic - started with references to how Liberty Steel would face problems if their bank went "phut", now IRL it's nearly all about Cameron
There are definite "synergies", yes, but I was thinking of Milano and the other cities that got hammered on derivative trades they had zero understanding of.
Comment