OUTLOOK: RBS may want to move, but England may not want it
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Outlook Business leaders would probably be best off steering clear of the Scottish independence referendum (I'm looking at you, Bob Dudley from BP).
A choice such as that being offered by this plebiscite will be decided primarily by emotion, and negative ones tend to be stirred up when wealthy businessmen start moaning or even threatening. But politicians need to choose their words with care too, particularly in this space.
Which is why Vince Cable's warning that an RBS left "more exposed than Iceland's institutions" would have to quit Edinburgh in favour of (most likely) England in the event of a "yes" vote isn't helpful to those massed behind the "better off together" banner. Even though he raises a valid point.
The rump UK would baulk at a currency union with Scotland without guarantees on spending, debt and the like. Having kept the UK out of the euro, it would be folly to allow a mini version of its crisis to develop were one of the members of a newly created sterling zone to live beyond its means and threaten to bring the house of cards crashing down as a result.
However, were the UK to respond to Scotland walking out by kicking it out of sterling, it does raise a question for the customers of Scotland's big banks (because Lloyds too is headquartered there). Would you want to park your money with an institution based in a country that wouldn't be able to bail out your deposits were it to go wrong (and which would be overseen by a new, untested, regulatory set-up)?
This is less of an issue for Lloyds, which is more or less stable now, but RBS has just warned of losses that could reach £8bn for 2013 thanks to past misdeeds, losses which won't nearly be covered by operating profits. And we're still awaiting a report into the activities of its Global Restructuring Group, commissioned by watchdogs in the wake of accusations of malpractice.
The Business Secretary said, based on this, that it would be "logical" for RBS to move its headquarters out of the country whose name it bears. But given the state that RBS is in, wouldn't it be just as logical for the remainder of the UK to resist any plans to locate the bank south of the border?
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments