Northern Rock Shareholders - Update
Caros consócios,
No seguimento do caso do Banco Northern Rock, contamos com a colaboração da nossa congénere no Reino Unido, a UK Shareholders Association (UKSA) que nos fez chegar o seguinte update.
Northern Rock Shareholders Action Group - Update No. 28
Last week a committee of the House of Commons, and the Lords, debated the Northern Rock Compensation Order. This is the regulation which will be used by the UK Government to establish the value of compensation to be offered to shareholders - it can be seen on the internet at: www.opsi.gov.uk
We asked our supporters to contact their members of Parliament to express their concerns on the terms of this Compensation Order and thanks to the many who did. We also made direct representations to the committee members.
In general terms the view of most politicians in these debates (from all political parties) seemed to be that the Government was right to restrict the compensation payable to shareholders, primarily on the principle that taxpayers should not be paying more, and that most shareholders were short term speculators anyway. Of course the latter was not true but unfortunately this is an allegation that has been repeatedly made in the press. There seemed to be little sympathy for the rights of shareholders, or the morality of expropriating their property without fair compensation. Even the Conservative politicians seemed to concentrate on raising technical points about the issue rather than attacking the Government’s actions directly, presumably in fear that they would seen as supporting a bail out of those “hedge funds” who had holdings in Northern Rock. This is of course a reference to SRM and RAB, and regrettably “hedge funds” are regularly demonised in the media for various reasons.
Let me simply say that I believe SRM and RAB have acted both ethically and reasonably during their involvement with Northern Rock. They offered support to the company and were prepared to subscribe for and underwrite a major rights issue. Their actions in calling for an EGM were necessary to protect their interests as shareholders and to show that shareholders were not going to be excluded from the decision making process on the future of the company. There are no grounds for criticising their actions
The Compensation Order was passed without opposition so it is now very clear, if it was not already, that shareholders will have to resort to legal action to establish their pro.
Roger Lawson
Communications Director
UK Shareholders Association
Email: uksa@uksa.org.uk
Web: www.uksa.org.uk