Scotland Yard lent police horse to Rebekah Brooks

 

The former Sun and News of the World editor was lent the horse in 2008, the year after Clive Goodman, who worked for her as royal editor of the News of the World, was jailed for phone-hacking along withe the private investigator Glenn Mulcaire. Officers from the Metropolitan Police Mounted Branch visited Mrs Brooks's home in the Cotswolds to check she had suitable facilities and was a competent rider before the horse went there. A spokesman for the Metropolitan Police pointed out that it is routine for retired Mounted Branch horses to be lent out to members of the public at the end of their working lives, but the arrangement is likely to raise fresh questions about the Met's relationship with Mrs Brooks. The news comes a day after the Leveson Inquiry was told that Mrs Brooks was briefed by a senior Met officer on the progress of the original phone-hacking inquiry and even consulted on how far she thought the investigation should go. Mrs Brooks, who is married to the former racehorse trainer Charlie Brooks, kept the horse at her home in the Cotswolds for two years before giving it back to the Metropolitan Police in 2010.  It was then found a new home in Norfolk with a serving police officer. Dave Wilson, Mrs Brooks's spokesman, said: "It's well known by people in the horse world that the Met looks for homes for horses once they retire. Rebekah took on a horse and effectively acted as a foster parent for it for a year or so. "The Met horse team comes out to make sure your facilities are right and proper. It's just a way of giving a temporary home to a horse that has had a distinguished service in the Met. It went off to a retirement paddock in Norfolk once it couldn't be ridden any more." At the time Mrs Brooks took on the horse, she was editor of The Sun, but had given evidence to a committee of MPs five years earlier admitting that the News of the World had paid policemen when she was editor of the Sunday paper between 2000 and 2003. By the time she gave the horse back to the Met she was chief executive of News International and the Met was facing calls to re-open its investigation into phone hacking following the disclosure that thousands of names of potential victims appeared in Mulcaire's notebooks. A spokesman for Scotland Yard said: "When a police horse reaches the end of its working life, Mounted Branch officers find it a suitable retirement home. Whilst responsibility for feeding the animal and paying vet bills passes to the person entrusted to its care at its new home, the horse remains the property of the Metropolitan Police Service. "Retired police horses are not sold on and can be returned to the care of the MPS at any time. In 2008 a retired MPS horse was loaned to Rebekah Brooks. The horse was subsequently re-housed with a police officer in 2010." The Metropolitan Police website states that: "At the end of the police horse's working life the animal is re-homed at one of many identified establishments who have previously contacted the Mounted Branch with a view to offering a home. "The Mounted Branch is looking for suitable homes for retired horses, that is homes where the horse will not be ridden. Anyone in the southeast of England offering such a home will be considered first."

Read More

Bank tax dodges halted by retrospective law

 

A bank in the UK has been forced to pay more than half a billion pounds in tax which it had dodged by using "highly abusive" tax avoidance schemes. One tax dodge involved the bank claiming it should not have to pay corporation tax on profits made when buying back its own IOUs. The government said it would change the law retrospectively and immediately to stop anyone else using the scheme. The identity of the bank has so far not been revealed. Announcing the crackdown, the Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury, David Gauke, said the bank should never have devised the schemes in the first place. "The bank that disclosed these schemes to HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) has adopted the Banking Code of Practice on Taxation which contains a commitment not to engage in tax avoidance," he said. "The government is clear that these are not transactions that a bank that has adopted the code should be undertaking. "We do not take today's action lightly, but the potential tax loss from this scheme and the history of previous abuse in this area mean that this is a circumstance where the decision to change the law with full retrospective effect is justified," he added. The second tax avoidance scheme, designed by the same bank, involved investment funds claiming that non-taxable income entitled the funds to tax credits that could be reclaimed from HMRC. The Treasury described this as "an attempt to secure 'repayment' from the Exchequer of tax that has not been paid". Compulsory notification A Treasury source suggested that outlawing the tax dodges immediately would save the government a further £2bn in tax that would otherwise have been foregone. The bank in question in fact disclosed the two schemes to the tax authorities under rules which have been in place since 2004. Anyone, such as a bank, accountant, lawyer or tax adviser, who devises a seemingly legal tax avoidance plan, is obliged to tell the tax authorities about it within a few days of using it or marketing it to clients. More than 2,000 schemes have been disclosed in the past eight years. "Quite a few of the disclosures have come from banks in the past," said John Whiting, of the Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT). "They are usually intended to sell to others such as clients." New code The banking code on taxation was first introduced by the Labour government in June 2009. It followed reports that some big banks used large scale tax avoidance schemes involving complex transactions and financial instruments. The code - which was supported by the incoming coalition government the following year - demands that banks which sign ensure that their tax and the tax obligations of their customers are observed. It says they should not go out of their way to avoid tax for themselves or clients. The 15 biggest banks operating in the UK have signed up. 'Treated even-handedly' In a separate development, HMRC said it would appoint a senior official to act as an "assurance commissioner" for any tax deals struck with big companies for more than £100m. The job of the commissioner will be to make sure taxpayers in general do not suffer from any such settlements. The move follows severe criticism last December from MPs on the public accounts committee who denounced HMRC for appearing to cut contentious tax deals with companies such as Vodafone and Goldman Sachs. Lin Homer, the new HMRC chief executive said: "This commissioner will take the role of challenging whether any proposed settlement secured the correct amount of tax efficiently and that taxpayers had been treated even-handedly." "The commissioner will also make sure that the governance procedures have been followed," she added.

Read More

The daily Sun had systematically paid large sums of money to “a network of corrupted officials” in the British police, military and government.

A day after presiding over the publication of his new, damn-the-critics Sun on Sunday tabloid, Rupert Murdoch was confronted with fresh allegations from a top police investigator that the daily Sun had systematically paid large sums of money to “a network of corrupted officials” in the British police, military and government. Connect With Us on Twitter Follow @nytimesworld for international breaking news and headlines. Twitter List: Reporters and Editors Readers’ Comments Share your thoughts. Post a Comment » Read All Comments (130) » The allegations, part of a deepening criminal probe into The Sun and Mr. Murdoch’s defunct News of the World, highlight the challenges to Mr. Murdoch and his News Corporation as he seeks to minimize the threat to his British media holdings. They also cast a harsh spotlight on the freewheeling pay-for-information culture of the British media. In public testimony on Monday, Deputy Assistant Commissioner Sue Akers, who is leading the criminal investigation into Mr. Murdoch’s newspapers, said The Sun, long a source of special pride and attention for Mr. Murdoch, had illegally paid the unidentified officials hundreds of thousands of dollars in exchange for news tips and “salacious gossip.” She said the payments had been authorized “at a very senior level within the newspaper.” Her comments, unusual during a continuing criminal inquiry, directly undercut Mr. Murdoch’s campaign of support for the embattled newspaper. On Feb. 17, the 80-year-old Mr. Murdoch made a grand entrance into the Sun newsroom, where, marching around in shirtsleeves, he vowed to reinstate journalists suspended in the criminal investigation, offered to pay their legal bills, issued a robust statement about the paper’s probity and announced that he was defying conventional industry wisdom by starting a Sunday issue. Ms. Akers said illegal activities had been rife at the paper. “There appears to have been a culture at The Sun of illegal payments, and systems have been created to facilitate such payments whilst hiding the identity of the officials receiving the money,” she told the Leveson Inquiry on media ethics and practices, led by Lord Justice Leveson. The payments involved “frequent and sometimes significant sums of money” to public officials, she said. In a statement, Mr. Murdoch said that “the practices Sue Akers described at the Leveson Inquiry are ones of the past, and no longer exist at The Sun.” He remained publicly bullish, helping promote the new Sun on Sunday in newspaper stores and announcing on Twitter that it had sold 3.26 million copies. In another blow to Mr. Murdoch, related this time to The News of the World, a lawyer for the Leveson Inquiry said Rebekah Brooks, a former Murdoch executive, was apparently informed by the police in 2006 that detectives had evidence that the cellphones of dozens of celebrities, politicians and sports figures had been illegally hacked by an investigator working for the newspaper. The disclosure, contained in a September 2006 e-mail from a company lawyer to the editor of The News of the World, Andy Coulson, is highly significant. Until late in 2010, Mrs. Brooks, Mr. Coulson and other officials at News International, the British newspaper arm of News Corporation, repeatedly asserted that the hacking had been limited to a single “rogue reporter” — the paper’s royal correspondent, Clive Goodman. The assertion was rendered implausible, at best, by the fact that the police had information that so many hacking victims existed, and that so few of them had anything to do with the royal family. Monday’s disclosures could not have come at a more inopportune time for Mr. Murdoch. In recent weeks, morale at The Sun hit a low point after a number of senior editors and reporters were arrested on suspicion of illegally paying sources. At the same time, journalists at The Sun and elsewhere released a stream of angry attacks at the police, saying the investigation had gone too far and was targeting reporters for what they said was normal behavior in the British tabloid press like taking sources out to lunch or paying whistle-blowers. “The Sun journalists who have been arrested are not accused of enriching themselves — they were simply researching stories about scandals at hospitals, scandals at army bases and scandals in police stations that they believed their readers were entitled to know about,” Kelvin Mackenzie, a former editor of The Sun, wrote in The Daily Mail. “If the whistle-blower asks for money, so what?” The Metropolitan Police Service’s highly unusual decision to release specific details of a continuing investigation seemed designed to rebut such criticism. “The cases we are investigating are not ones involving the odd drink, or meal, to police officers or other public officials,” Ms. Akers said. “Instead, these are cases in which arrests have been made involving the delivery of regular, frequent and sometimes significant sums of money to small numbers of public officials by journalists.”

Read More

Shock, horror! Murdoch's Sun wants his readers back

 

Rupert Murdoch bid to grab back the huge audience his News Corp lost when it closed the best-selling News of the World over a phone-hacking scandal with a new Sunday edition of his Sun tabloid filled with gossip, girls and celebrities. With a front page splashing on a female TV presenter's birthing difficulties - "My heart stopped for 40 seconds" - the top-selling daily Sun made its Sunday debut, aiming to win back the 2.7 million people who had read News of the World until its closure in July in Britain's biggest recent press scandal.

Read More

From hacker to tycoon: The wild ride of Kim Dotcom, alleged kingpin of online piracy

 

On his way up, he fooled them all: judges, journalists, investors and companies. Then the man who renamed himself Kim Dotcom finally did it. With an outsized ego and an eye for get-rich schemes, he parlayed his modest computing skills into an empire, becoming the fabulously wealthy computer maverick he had long claimed to be. Now his wild ride may be over. Last month he was arrested in New Zealand for allegedly facilitating millions of illegal downloads of songs and movies through Megaupload, his once-popular website, now an important focus of the entertainment industry's war on online piracy. U.S. prosecutors are seeking the 38-year-old German's extradition in what they say could be one of the largest copyright cases in history. Dotcom, who denies the charges, was freed on bail Wednesday after a month in jail, and authorities have seized, among other things, his twin giant TV sets, massive statue of the "Predator" movie monster and Rolls-Royce (vanity plate: GOD). His story is one of breathtaking audacity that spans both the globe and the modern computing era. Interviews conducted by The Associated Press and a review of court documents and other records indicate that Dotcom was able to create a legendary past, trade upon it by manipulating the news media and avoid serious consequences when he broke the law. Dotcom makes for a larger-than-life defendant in almost every respect: U.S. court papers describe him as about 1.95 meters (6 feet, 5 inches) tall and weighing 146 kilograms (322 pounds). At various times, he has depicted himself online as a playboy surrounded by beautiful women, fast cars and guns; a terrorist hunter and a technology martyr ready to commit suicide. Now he is confined to his home, has refused through his lawyers to grant interviews, and is forbidden to log on to the Internet. Born Kim Schmitz in the German coastal town of Kiel, Dotcom grew up with an alcoholic father. As a teen, he created a mystique for himself that led the Sunday Telegraph of London to call him a "superhacker." German hackers interviewed by the AP, however, say he did little of what he claimed. "He was trying to make half a buck on every occasion offered him," said Dirk Engling, spokesman for the Chaos Computer Club, which eventually banned Schmitz from attending any of their events. "Not having some real skills of his own, he was always using other people's inventions to attack systems and then claim he did it." Engling said Schmitz ended up putting club members in legal jeopardy through his recklessness, but some wanted to work with him anyway because he radiated the social ease they lacked. One of his first schemes, according to Engling, was selling pirated software from an online mailbox. In 1998, a Munich court convicted Schmitz and an accomplice of computer fraud and of buying and selling stolen phone cards. They got off with a fine and probation for what the judge called "youthful foolishness." Schmitz came to court wearing a black suit and sunglasses, saying he loved "feeling like a spy." Three years after his first conviction, he had resurfaced as a high-flying venture capitalist. He told reporters his company was worth $200 million and that he was rescuing the struggling online startup company "LetsBuyIt" with an initial cash injection of up to four million euros ($5 million) and a promise of another 50 million euros ($65 million). Reporters published his bogus story, sending the stock skyrocketing. On the first day, LetsBuyIt leaped from 19 cents to 27 cents a share. The next day, it was up to 77 cents. He appeared in an online video depicting himself living it up on a superyacht in Monaco, with beautiful women draped on his arms: "Kim Schmitz is a PR man's nightmare and a journalist's dream," wrote the Telegraph. A German court would hear later that he had pulled a textbook "pump-and-dump" move, borrowing money to buy Letsbuyit shares, and then quickly selling them to those who swallowed his investment story, gaining himself a quick profit of 1.1 million euros ($1.4 million). But before authorities could catch up with him on the LetsBuyIt scam came the Sept. 11 attacks, and he captured fresh headlines by offering $10 million for the capture of Osama bin Laden. He claimed to have formed Yihat — Young Intelligent Hackers Against Terrorism — to wage cyberwar against banks harboring terrorist money. That one backfired on him when hacker pranksters calling themselves Fluffy Bunny posted a lewd picture on his website. Sought by German authorities over the LetsBuyIt scam, he fled to Thailand in January 2002, writing on his website that "A German high-tech fairy tale is to end." He then posted a troubling message suggesting he would commit suicide on his 28th birthday: "Enough is Enough. Kim Schmitz will die next Monday. See it on this website live and for free. When the countdown is over, Kim steps into a new world and wants you to see it."

Read More

Adele joked that she wanted boyfriend Simon Konecki to buy her an engagement ring so big “you can see it from space”.

Bling ring: Adele and boyfriend Simon KoneckiXposurephotos

Adele joked that she wanted boyfriend Simon Konecki to buy her an engagement ring so big “you can see it from space”.

Yet the award-winning singer, 23, wanted to make sure no one saw her as she slipped away from the Brits.

She covered her head with a coat as she gave the aftershow parties a miss and headed back to her hotel with 36-year-old Si.

Earlier, Adele denied the ring she was wearing was anything more than a fashion accessory.

Overheard being asked whether she’d like her fella to propose and give her a diamond ring, she laughed: “I want one you can see from space.”

Now Adele is happier than she has ever been with charity boss Simon and says the prospect of writing another record based on a doomed relationship seems deeply depressing.

Speaking to US network CBS’s 60 Minutes recently, she said: “Because I’m madly in love I don’t want to be like, ‘Babe, I’m sorry, we’ve got to break up. I’ve got a new album to ­deliver now.’

“I can’t write another break-up record, that would be a real cliché. It would be just like a boring, running theme. ­People would be like: ‘No, that’s enough now, cheer up.’”

Her new relationship is going so well she now struggles to connect with her biggest hit Someone Like You, which was inspired by her most recent ex.

“Someone Like You was about him getting engaged really quickly after we broke up,” she said.

“I wrote that to feel better about myself and it was about trying to convince myself that we will meet someone and I will be happy.

“In fact, next time I sing Someone Like You, I’m going to be like, never mind, I found someone like you. Please forget me!”

Read More

European court rules against Italy for expelling migrants

European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) on Thursday ruled that Italy had violated it human rights obligations when it deported a group of African migrants intercepted in the Mediterranean Sea to Libya in 2009. The decision delivered in Strasbourg by 17 judges of the court was described as a 'landmark' by the United Nation's Refugee Agency (UNHCR) and was also welcomed by several rights groups in Italy and elsewhere. Italy's International Cooperation Minister, Andrea Riccardi, said that the ruling would force Italy to 'think and rethink our policies towards migration.' The case concerned 24 Somalis and Eritreans who were in a group of 200 migrants intercepted by the Italian Coast Guard 35 nautical miles from the Italian island of Lampedusa.

Read More

Belarus fights Europe to retain death penalty

Belarusian MPs have blasted a recent resolution of the European Parliament on death penalty in Belarus as an attempt to interfere in the country’s internal affairs. The Belarusian parliamentary commission on international affairs has issued an official statement saying that the European Parliament’s resolution on the death penalty in Belarus was a continuation of the practice of pressuring Belarusian authorities and meddling with the country’s internal affairs. Additionally, the Belarusian side noted that from the text of the resolution they could draw a conclusion that the European side did not pay much attention to the credibility of facts and the logic of conclusions. In particular, the Belarusian parliamentarians criticized the fact that the case of Metro bombers Konovalov and Kovalyov, mentioned in the resolution, is called unjust, despite of the fact that the trial in the case was open to the maximum and well-covered by the media. The Belarusian politicians also expressed surprise over the fact that their country was called the Belarusian Federation in the European Parliament’s resolution, while its official name is Republic of Belarus. However, the text of the resolution posted on the European Parliament’s website in English uses the correct name. Belarusian MPs stressed that the use of capital punishment in their country is not against international norms and its use is extremely limited, and in practice happens only in extraordinary cases. The ban on capital punishment is the internal affair of the Republic of Belarus and can only be made with consideration of the Belarusian society’s opinion, the politicians said.

Read More

Fishing skippers fined £720,000

 

Seventeen skippers behind one of Scotland's biggest fishing scams have been fined a total of £720,000. The group admitted making illegal landings of mackerel and herring worth £47.5 million between January 1 2002 and March 19 2005. The "black fish" scam, which broke sea fishing laws, was carried out at fish processing factory Shetland Catch in Lerwick, Shetland. Judge Lord Turnbull said the scam is "an episode of shame" for the pelagic fishing industry. He said it was a "cynical and sophisticated" operation which had the "connivance of a number of different interested parties". Hamish Slater, 53, and Alexander Masson, 66, both from Fraserburgh, were fined a respective £80,000 and £50,000, while Alexander Wiseman, 60, from Banff, was also fined £50,000. Another 13 men from Shetland were fined for their role in the scam. Robert Polson, 48, was fined £70,000; John Irvine, 68, was fined £80,000; William Williamson, 65, was fined £45,000; Laurence Irvine, 66, was fined £80,000; and David Hutchison, 66, was fined £40,000, as was 56-year-old Thomas Eunson. Both Allister Irvine, 63, and Gary Williamson, 52, were fined £35,000; and George Henry, 60, was fined £12,000. John Stewart, 57, was ordered to pay £15,000, while George Anderson, 56, must pay £12,000. Colin Leask, 39, and Allen Anderson, 55, were each fined £3,000 A £70,000 fine was imposed on Victor Buchini, 51, from Poulton-le-Fylde in Lancashire. The company Alexander Buchan was fined £240,000 for helping the vessel masters land the undeclared fish. The pelagic fishermen, who committed the offences to evade the annual EU fishing quota, had already been ordered to hand over almost £3 million in confiscation orders at a previous court hearing. The convictions came as the result of a seven-year investigation, Operation Trawler, after the Scottish Fisheries Protection Agency (SFPA), now Marine Scotland, became suspicious about widespread illegal landing of fish within the pelagic fleet. Pelagic fish are those which swim near the water's surface. Auditors KPMG reviewed Shetland Catch and found that between January 1 2002 and March 28 2004, the company's earnings were not supported by its declared landings. The company premises were searched on September 27 2005 and officials found that scales used to weigh fish coming into the factory had been manipulated to provide false weights. Management were able to input fake wastage figures into a computer in the main factory, accessible to inspectors from the SFPA, which would be deducted from the actual weight shown on the screen. The proper weight was displayed on screens in the engineer's room and in a loft area, both of which were off-limits to SFPA officials. The computer in the loft area was where the weight manipulation took place. It could be accessed remotely by two members of staff, a fish buyer and the then assisting managing director, using a username and password, allowing them to program it to provide false weights. Lord Turnbull said the proceedings brought "embarrassment and shame" to the skippers and their families. He said: "All of the accused who appear today have spent their working lives as productive and hard-working members of our community. Barring other regulatory infringements, not a single one has ever come into any conflict with the law. "It was not surprising therefore to hear of the well-respected positions within their communities which many held and of the embarrassment and shame which these proceedings have brought to them personally and to their families." The judge said the fishing industry "makes a crucial contribution" to the well-being of many communities and to the economy of the country as a whole. He added: "There would of course be no fishing industry were it not for the willingness of fishermen to go to sea. It is correct to acknowledge that in doing so,fishermen require to cope with challenging circumstances of isolation from family members and often with dangerous and frightening weather conditions, the likes of which will be wholly unfamiliar to others with more conventional working environments. "Over the history of the fishing industry and even in recent times in Scotland, tragedy has often visited the families of those who spend their working lives at sea." The judge also noted that each master involved "made no attempt" to disguise their true income from the fish and paid income tax on both the declared and undeclared landings. But he said the men had all participated in "a deliberate and calculated determination to evade the quota levels for fishing available to each vessel" for "purely financial" reasons. He said: "The system through which this was achieved was both cynical and sophisticated and involved the connivance of a number of different interested parties, some of whom have benefited but have not been prosecuted. "The extent to which landings of fish were deliberately under-declared was at times truly staggering and in the case of some of the accused concerned, took place continuously over a three-year period. "What I found to be noteworthy was that no understandable explanation was provided on behalf of any the vessel masters as to why this practice was commenced or continued with. "No one for example appears to have engaged in this exercise on account of struggling to cope financially with the costs of continued fishing within the quota levels allocated. "Indeed, in contrast to some within the fishing industry, those engaged in fishing with the pelagic fleet appear to have been able to make very substantial sums over many years, providing very comfortable livings for themselves and their families. "In short then, and as was conceded by at least some of those who appeared before me, the motivation for the sustained furnishing of false information was purely financial. Those who were already making a good living saw this as a way in which more income could be generated. "No doubt the fact that so many were involved lent a veneer of acceptability to the conduct but there is another side to that as well: the fact that so many were prepared to participate in deliberate lies and falsehood means that the desire for financial benefit was able to overshadow the instincts of fairness, truthfulness and responsibility which will have influenced every other aspect of the lives of those concerned and which values they would expect to see others, including their own family members, abide by. "The result is an episode of shame for much of the whole pelagic fishing industry. "I have however accepted in each case that these proceedings have been responded to responsibly and that those concerned regret their involvement and the embarrassment which has been brought to them personally and to their families." The men had previously been subjected to a reduced quota of fish to "balance out" the environmental effect of years of overfishing. But the judge insisted that this was not a punishment but an "exercise in conservation". He said: "I do not accept that the accused in this case have lost out or have been made worse off as a consequence of these arrangements. I accept as accurate the observation that looking back with hindsight had they never over-fished at all then they would have achieved a greater income over the extended period than they in fact have. "That is due to the massive increase in the prices obtained for the type of fish with which I am concerned in the period since 2002. That however is no more than an irony of the situation. It does not reflect any actual loss to those concerned. In fact, as a consequence of the increased value of the fish, those involved have still been able to generate very substantial incomes, despite being restricted to catching a smaller quantity. "If the current prices remain stable then when the quota deduction arrangements have been exhausted, they will be in a position to increase that income even further." He also referred to "activities of foreign fishing vessels" in exceeding fishing quotas. The judge said: "If there is an imbalance in the approach of the relevant authorities within the European Union, that is a matter for the relevant ministers to raise with their counterparts. "If vessels belonging to states outwith the European Union are thought to enjoy some inappropriate benefit or are not thought to be complying with their responsibilities concerning stock conservation, that is a matter to be addressed at governmental or international level. "I am dealing with the contravention of a law of this country which was introduced to ensure compliance with the international obligation which the United Kingdom had entered into. "I am entitled to treat that contravention as a serious matter regardless of how it might be thought that similar conduct would be or has been responded to elsewhere." Three more fishermen pleaded guilty today in a separate case but which was part of the same investigation. James Smith, 54, from Fraserburgh, John Smith, 36, from Peterhead and Stephen Bellamy, 59, from Fraserburgh all admitted landing undeclared fish at Fresh Catch in Peterhead and at Shetland Catch in Lerwick. Sentencing was deferred to May 18. An inspection in November 2005 at the Alexander Buchan firm detected an unofficial weigh belt fitted with "load cells" to the conveyor belt system at the point where fish entered the factory. The cells are used to detect the weight of fish passing over the belt. A deflector plate had been used on the unofficial weigh belt, allowing the fish to drop off part of the way along the official scales. As the fish did not travel over the full area, a lower weight was achieved on the counter. This method is said to have allowed up to 70% of a total landing to go unrecorded. Alexander Buchan, which is no longer trading, has already been ordered to pay £165,000 in a confiscation order. A third fish processing factory, Fresh Catch, also admitted helping vessel masters land undeclared fish between October 20 2002 and September 2 2005 at its premises in Kirk Square near Peterhead. Skippers Ernest Simpson, 64, from Fraserburgh, Allan Simpson, 42, from Fraserburgh, and Oswald McRonald, 63, from Banff, pleaded guilty at the High Court in Glasgow today to landing undeclared fish at the factory. Their sentences were also deferred until May 18. Fresh Catch was audited by KPMG during the same period as Shetland Catch and it too was found to have earnings unsupported by official landing figures. At the factory, fish entered via a delivery pipe which went up and over the building. However, a search of the premises in September 2005 uncovered a purpose-built pipe, leading underground, was also connected. This second pipe bypassed the official weigh scale. Knife valves were used to divert the fish when they came to a T-junction, allowing fish to be sent to another part of the factory and was never weighed or officially accounted for. In 2005 the two valves become remote controlled and the direction the fish took at the junction depended on which one was open or closed. Fresh Catch only became significantly operational at around the time the scam began. Cephas Ralph, head of compliance at Marine Scotland, said the divert pipe "certainly served no other purpose" and that "it wasn't put there by accident". All three factories were prosecuted out of Operation Trawler which started in 2005. However, nothing suggested any of the plants were linked. At the time of the undeclared landings, Shetland Catch was the largest pelagic fish processing operator in Scotland and one of the largest in Europe. It was able to process and freeze up to 1,000 tonnes of fish a day. EU regulations state that when a vessel reaches its quota, it has the option to either stop fishing or to buy some of another vessel's quota which has not yet been reached. Any vessel which exceeds its quota faces disciplinary action. When the investigation started 26 vessels were in the pelagic fleet, with eight pelagic fish processing factories. More than half (15) of those boats have been prosecuted. Mr Ralph said the investigation had an immediate effect on the entire industry and that Marine Scotland is now satisfied that legislation is in place to ensure a similar scam does not happen again. He said: "Since 2005 we detected a change which spilled out beyond the pelagic industry. It is more important to the vessels to have a good reputation. "It is fair to say we are satisfied that we have inspection procedures, legislation, a mindset in place in the industry that means if such activity was to recommence, it would be quickly detected and dealt with. "We have not had anything similar since these cases and all our intelligence suggests that no similar activities are taking place." Afterwards Lindsey Miller, head of the serious and organised crime division of the Crown Office, said: "Organised crime takes many forms. These individuals may not have been involved in drug dealing or prostitution but let us make no mistake that they were involved in significant and serious organised criminality." She added: "The legislation is there to protect the marine environment for the good of all and to safeguard the future of the fishing industry. These men disregarded it for their own financial gain and, in a clear example of successful working between the law enforcement agencies involved, have now been brought to justice and made to pay for their crimes." The police investigation was led by Detective Superintendent Gordon Gibson of Grampian Police who said the scale of the crime is of "a level rarely seen before". The men involved "amassed huge sums of money through their own greed and today this caught up with them in a court of law", he added. Meanwhile, Cephas Ralph said: "Today's successful court activity is an outcome that reflects the professionalism, dedication and commitment shown by all of the Marine Scotland staff who have been involved in this inquiry. "It has not been an easy task but they have worked tirelessly to help secure the convictions obtained in these important cases." Scottish Environment Secretary Richard Lochhead paid tribute to the police and Marine Scotland for their efforts in "a long and vastly complicated inquiry". He said: "There is no doubt that these illegal activities are a stark and shameful reminder of the culture that existed in some sectors of the fishing industry in past years. But they do not reflect the much-improved culture we see today. "The offences date back up to a decade ago and thankfully there has been seismic change in the attitude and behaviour of the fishing fleet, which can only be good thing in securing a viable future for the industry in Scotland." He also said: "There have been significant advances in recent years in how fish landings are monitored and controlled, including comprehensive audits and certified weighing systems." Dr Mireille Thom, senior marine policy officer at WWF Scotland, said ignoring quotas "isn't a victim-less offence" because "such landings not only undermine the conservation of fish stocks and the fortune of the fleets that fish them, they also distort competition by depressing fish prices. In short, they threaten the public good for the benefit of a few".

Read More

Police uncover 'serious and organised' criminality in £63m scam to breach European fishing quotas

An inquiry into the UK's largest fishing scandal has uncovered "serious and organised" criminality by Scottish trawlermen and fish processors in an elaborate scam to illegally sell nearly £63m of undeclared fish.

Three large fish factories and 27 skippers have pleaded guilty to sophisticated and lucrative schemes to breach EU fishing quotas, in what one senior police officer described as "industrial level" deception.

They went to extraordinary lengths to conceal their illegally caught fish, installing underground pipelines, secret weighing machines and extra conveyor belts and computers to allow them to land 170,000 tonnes above their EU quota of mackerel and herring between 2002 and 2005.

The extent of the "black landings" scandal emerged as 17 skippers and one of the three factories were given fines totalling nearly £1m at the high court in Glasgow on Friday, after admitting repeated breaches of the Sea Fishing (Enforcement of Community Control Measures) (Scotland) Order 2000. Another six skippers pleaded guilty at the same hearing to landing undeclared fish worth nearly £7m at Lerwick, in the Shetlands, and Peterhead, Aberdeenshire.

Four skippers pleaded guilty in January and a further four in the ring, who can't be named for legal reasons, are still to be prosecuted.

Judge Lord Turnbull, told the 17 skippers sentenced on Friday they were guilty of a "cynical and sophisticated" operation, which brought embarrassment and shameon them and their families. "The motivation was purely financial," he said. "Those who were already making a good living saw this as a way more income could be generated and were prepared to participate in deliberate lies and falsehoods."

Once the illegally caught fish had been sneaked past Government inspectors, it was put on sale in the Lerwick and Peterhead markets, where it was sold to wholesalers and fishmongers as if it had been legally landed, in defiance of strict EU regulations designed to protectEurope's fish stocks from over-fishing.

The Guardian can reveal that the illegally landed fish was sold with the knowledge of the government-funded industry marketing authority Seafish, which took a £2.58 levy for every tonne of over-quota mackerel and herring. That earned it £434,000 in fees before the Scottish Fisheries Protection Agency, now part of Marine Scotland, raided two factories in September 2005.

The headquarters of Seafish in Edinburgh were raided by police and documents seized in 2008, but five months later prosecutors decided not to take any further action. It is thought the Crown Office, the Scottish prosecution body, believed there was no evidence that could lead to the agency being accused of involvement in the scam.

With a series of court cases stretching back to 2010, the scandal has implicated more than half the Scottish mackerel and herring fleet active at that time. It is understood that the true value of the illegal landings linked to the factories involved is closer to £100m, but prosecutors decided to pursue just £63m of landings.

How one Peterhead factory sidestepped the rules. Source: Guardian graphics

Prosecutors have also confiscated £3.1m from 17 skippers who landed catches in Lerwick, and against two of the three firms so far convicted, under proceedings of crime legislation introduced to tackle serious criminal gangs and drugs lords. The largest confiscation order, £425,9000, was against Hamish Slater, the skipper of the trawler Enterprise from Fraserburgh, Aberdeenshire, who admitted landing £3,980,000 worth of undeclared fish. A number of skippers landed fish worth more than £2m.

At Shetland Catch in Lerwick, one of Europe's largest fish processors, the company installed a duplicate conveyor belt when its new factory was built, fitting a secret weight-reading device in the loft and a computer in an engineer's workshop "a considerable distance" from the factory floor.

In its processing plant at Peterhead, north of Aberdeen, Fresh Catch installed an underground pipe to divert fish to secret weighing devices, which used remotely operated pneumatic valves. It built a secret storage room, and operated the clandestine machinery from a hut known to workers as the Wendy House, disguised with fake "Danger: high voltage" signs on its door.

A second factory in the town, Alexander Buchan, which has since closed, fitted a secret scale and conveyor belt, which allowed up to 70% of a boat's catch to go undeclared. It printed a guidance manual showing its staff how to handle undeclared landings, and its staff misled trading standards officers about its purpose.

Detective Superintendent Gordon Gibson, of Grampian police, the senior investigating officer in Operation Trawler, said: "Make no bones about it: it was serious, it was organised and it was criminal. The element of preparation involved was significant, given the methods and means that all these individuals went to.

"Was I surprised? Absolutely. I was surprised at the levels they had gone to disguise their criminal conduct."

An industry source admitted: "This wasn't casual or by accident. It was organised, it was systematic, it was deception. No one disagrees with that."

In a further penalty, which is thought to have cost the convicted skippers millions, the European commission cut the quotas soon after the scandal was reported to Brussels by the UK government in 2005, calling it a "quota payback".

Although none of the trawlermen have been banned from fishing, their quotas were cut by more than 116,000 tonnes of mackerel and nearly 47,000 tonnes of herring over a seven-year period. That payback will end next year.

One source with detailed knowledge of the case said this had damaging consequences for skippers and crews involved, as the market value of mackerel and herring since 2005 had been as much as double the price 10 years ago.

The convictions follow a complex, 10-year investigation involving forensic accountants from KPMG, who analysed the paperwork for thousands of landings, a core team of 25 detectives and support staff from Grampian and Northern police, four British sea fishery officers with Marine Scotland, the Home Office Holmes police computer system, money laundering experts with the Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency, and specialist prosecutors at the Crown Office.

Operation Trawler has brought to an end a practice which was once endemic in the British fishing industry, but has been made extremely difficult by hi-tech monitoring and tracking of every registered trawler at sea, and much tighter controls on landings at processing firms.

The skippers and firms involved have refused to discuss their convictions; Shetland Catch is still facing confiscation proceedings. But sources with detailed knowledge of the scandal have admitted the practice was widespread within the pelagic fishing industry. Lawyers for one of the convicted men, George Anderson, 55, from Whalsay, Shetland, claimed this year that he evaded the controls because he believed that discarding under-sized fish was "repugnant".

"Black landings" are still common practice across the EU, and prosecutions still take place. In Lerwick and Peterhead, some insist that the undeclared landings, which helped many of the skippers and their crews enjoy comparatively luxurious lifestyles, were well-known within the industry and among regulators.

Asked about its knowledge of the illegal landings, Seafish told the Guardian it was legally required to take the levy, and insisted it had tipped off the authorities to the over-quota landings. However, one source said that the issue was discussed in board meetings, "but the Seafish line was that we weren't a fishery protection agency, our job was to take a levy on every tonne landed."

He added: "They were totally aware they were getting a levy on quota and over-quota fish."

The source denied it was serious and organised crime: the skippers involved paid income tax and business taxes alongside the Seafish levy on all their illegal landings, largely because the over-quota fish was sold in the fish markets as if it were legally declared. Fraud charges were dropped by prosecutors at an early stage, he said.

But he added: "There is nobody defending this. It was morally wrong; it was ecologically wrong and sustainably wrong. There is no excuse.

"A lot of the skippers are saying, 'What we did wasn't right; it was wrong. We really want to draw a line under this and move forward.'"

He said the scandal had the effect of transforming Scotland's pelagic fishing industry into one of the most sustainable in the world: after the raids, the mackerel and herring fleet introduced very strict monitoring and quota management. Since 2008, its fisheries have won a prized Marine Stewardship Council eco-label, and are now the largest in Europe with MSC certification.

But the "black landings" scandal is coming back to haunt the industry. It is expected to lose its MSC accreditation later this year after a bitter dispute with the Faroe Islands and Iceland: both countries have claimed much larger mackerel quotas than is sustainable for the north-east Atlantic stocks, in breach of MSC rules. The Faroese in particular believe the over-quota prosecutions puts the Scottish industry's credibility in severe doubt.

"It's not a proud moment for what is a very proud industry," one senior figure conceded.

Richard Lochhead, the Scottish agriculture secretary, said the convicted were guilty of appalling behaviour. "These illegal activities are a stark and shameful reminder of the culture that existed in some sectors of the fishing industry in past years," he said.

"Thankfully, there has been seismic change in the attitude and behaviour of the fishing fleet, which can only be good thing in securing a viable future for the industry."

Dr Mireille Thom, a senior marine policy officer for the conservation group WWF Scotland, said: "Deliberately ignoring quota rules by landing 'black fish' isn't a victimless offence. Such landings not only undermine the conservation of fish stocks and the fortune of the fleets that fish them, they also distort competition by depressing fish prices. In short, they threaten the public good for the benefit of a few."

Read More

One in seven Cambridge students 'has sold drugs to help pay their way through university'

 

One in seven Cambridge students is  dealing drugs to help pay their way through university, according to a survey. It found many claim that they have been forced to sell illegal substances to friends to make ends meet as they study. And it revealed nearly two-thirds admitted taking drugs, with cannabis the most  popular substance.

Read More

Virgin Media boards the 4G train

 

Virgin Media is planning trials of 4G telephony in several UK cities, dropping fibre-connected LTE Small Cells into urban areas, to see how easily decent coverage could be established. This follows a single-cell trial the company did in Oxford Street in December, but involves more areas and a lot more cells. Virgin Media isn't saying whether or not it'll bid for any of the 2.6GHz band in which the trials will operate, but it's not saying never either. Knowing how well the gear works is advantageous, so this is a technology trial rather than a test of any consumer offering, but interesting none the less. Virgin Media already has a consumer mobile offering - the Virgin Mobile virtual network that camps on Everything Everywhere's network - and is looking forward to being able to offer 4G on that network (by the end of 2012, if EE is to be believed). But deploying its own network is an obvious evolution and could be accomplished while still roaming onto EE's infrastructure where necessary. The base stations being tested, built by Airspan, are physically small - ideal for dropping into lamp posts or bolting onto walls according to the company - but they also feature wireless backhaul so only need power to start routing calls. That technology was developed by the UK company Picochip, which recently got itself acquired by US outfit Mindspeed. One can easily imagine Virgin Media buying some spectrum at the mega-auction later this year, dropping similar femtocells into customer homes and then letting customers roam onto EE's network when out and about. Neil Berkett, Virgin Media's CEO, reckoned his biz could deploy metropolitan Wi-Fi in London for a few million as it already has so much infrastructure, so replace those Wi-Fi routers with 4G cells and you've got yourself a mobile network. But, on the other hand, Virgin Media already sells a lot of its network capacity to the network operators, so it could just set up the cells and then rent them out to someone who owned some frequencies in which they could operate. Let EE or similar take care of running the network, with Virgin Media providing the backhaul for a real operator while leaving Virgin Mobile as a virtual operator. Realistically it's a bit of both, a project to gain information which will be useful either way. All the network operators are running up LTE trials at the moment, and Virgin wouldn’t want to be left out, but what it will do with the information once its gained remains to be seen.

Read More

Virgin boss Richard Branson wins control of ‘embarrassing’ .xxx porn web address

 

The entrepreneur took Sean Truman to the National Arbitration Forum, a body based in the United States that adjudicates on disputes over the rights to web addresses. It found that Mr Truman “should have recognized that his registration and control of 'richardbranson.xxx' would serve to vex or embarrass” Sir Richard. “Registering and holding a .xxx domain name identical to [Sir Richard’s] mark without having any rights or interests therein is evidence of bad faith registration and use,” it said in its ruling. The controversial .xxx top-level domain was introduced after several years of wrangling at ICANN, the organisation in charge of the web’s address system. The Bush administration blocked the creation of an area of the web devoted to pornography after lobbying by Christian groups, but the company behind the venture successfully appealed the decision. Brand owners were invited to block addresses based on their trademarks for a one-off fee, before .xxx opened for general registrations in December. Sir Richard's is only the second dispute over a .xxx address to be decided on by authorities. The first conerned heb.xxx, which was successfully reclaimed by a Texas supermarket chain.

Read More

Thousands could claim tax refunds on iPhones, Blackberry and Android smartphones

THousands of people with smartphones provided by their employer will be able to reclaim hundreds of pounds in tax refunds, following a rule change by HM Revenue & Customs. HMRC used to insist that smartphones, such as iPhones, Blackberry and many Android devices, were not the same as conventional mobile phones and so were subject to tax as a ‘benefit in kind’ where employers provided them to employees who were allowed to use them outside work. Now the tax authorities have decided they are ‘appy’ to waive the tax on new technology. The about-turn  follows a dramatic increase in the number of smartphones in the UK. The regulator Ofcom estimates that 47 per cent of all teenagers and a quarter of all adults in the UK own a smartphone. Chris Lee, a partner at accountants James Cowper, said: “HMRC has finally woken-up and found itself in the 21st Century. Smartphones are in many cases an indispensable business tool and it is right that they should not be treated as a taxable benefit.” The new interpretation of the rules potentially allows employees to reclaim any tax they might have paid back to the tax year 2007/08. Mr Lee said this could amount to several hundreds of pounds: “Unlike ordinary mobile phones, which can be provided tax free to employees, smartphones have until now been treated as a taxable benefit. Tax can be charged on 20pc of the value of the device plus private usage costs. Smartphones can cost upwards of £400, so employees who have had a smartphone for several years could potentially claim back £200 or £300”. The new rules do not apply to tablet computers, such as iPads, even though it is possible to make and receive calls via them. Devices that uses Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP) systems to make and receive phone calls are unlikely to meet the new definition of a mobile phone, so they may continue to be subject to tax where provided by employers. Richard Mannion, a director of accountants Smith & Williamson, explained: “The benefit in kind rules provide that where an employer provides an employee with a mobile phone there is no income tax payable on the benefit whether or not the phone is used for private calls, provided the contract is between employer and the phone operator. “Previously HMRC said that the definition of mobile phone for this purpose did not extend to a smartphone, but they have now announced that they have changed their mind with retrospective effect. This is a pragmatic and welcome recognition by HMRC that their original interpretation has been overtaken by the speed of change in technology.” However, taxpayers will also need to move quickly if they want to make the most of refunds. The deadline for making repayment claims relating to the tax year that ended on April 5, 2008, is April 5, 2012. So anyone eligible to reclaim tax for that year will need to get their skates on.

Read More

Augmented reality set to enhance London Eye's pods

From the London Eye to London Fashion Week, the latest technology to hit the mainstream is reconstructing reality itself. So-called “augmented reality” (AR), which uses a smartphone or a tablet to layer extra information over an onscreen image of the real world, is set to be all around us in the near future. At the avant garde end of the spectrum, Google is said to be developing eye glasses that integrate the technology into a RoboCop-style vision of the future. Although Google itself refused to confirm the rumours, the New York Times reports that the glasses will use the same operating system as Google’s mobile phone, and cost about the same as a top smartphone. Scrolling will be achieved via slight inclinations of the head and neck. Apparently, once learnt, such movements are “almost indistinguishable to outside users”. Some applications, however, are already far beyond Google’s experimental stage. In fact, it is the simple assembling of technologies that are already commonplace for mobile phones. A digital camera and internet connectivity are combined with location data – so if you point your phone at Big Ben, it’s comparatively simple to add information to the image on screen. And while the obvious use is, say, historical information, there’s space for advertisers and social services to tell you where to meet up with friends for a drink, for example. This may sound somewhat futuristic, but it’s certainly not the distant future. Visitors to the London Eye will, from next month, be able use a new app for tablets and phones based on Google’s Android operating system, and subsequently for Apple’s iPhones and iPads.

Read More

Fraud: Organised crime - Bogus claims gangs cast a wider net

 

According to the Insurance Fraud Bureau, the cost of organised fraud to the industry is approximately £200m per year. While this is only a small portion of the estimated £1.6bn total cost of fraud, it is of particular concern because it is typically carried out by organised gangs, often using the money to fund serious illegal activity, such as people trafficking, arms dealing and terrorism. Although there are isolated examples of fraud rings operating in arson and disability claims, the vast majority of organised fraud involves motor insurance. It is an unfortunate truth that the criminal gangs instigating this type of fraud are rarely identified by insurers or the police, as they operate ‘behind the scenes’ — persuading others to make personal injury claims on the back of accidents that are either staged or entirely fabricated. Historically, those targeted by gangs to take part in fraud have largely followed a well-defined profile, predominantly males in the 25 to 44 age bracket, living in more deprived postcodes. These individuals also tend to have a history of suspect claims or minor criminality. There is mounting evidence, however, that this is changing, as the gangs behind the scams cast their net wider in search of the ideal claimant. This is borne out by analysis of the thousands of fraud ring cases investigated by Keoghs. Case analysis Analysis of cases handled over the past 12 months shows the number of fraudsters within the 18 to 25 age bracket has increased by 10%, compared with the previous year. Meanwhile, the proportion of fraudsters in the 26 to 30 bracket has fallen by 0.5%. This trend is also starting to be recognised across the industry; in a survey of Keoghs' insurer clients compiled in September, 83% of those noticing a change in the average age of fraud claimants said they had seen a marked decrease in their age. Another trend, more difficult to quantify, but suggested by anecdotal evidence, is that organised fraud is becoming a more middle-class pursuit, with the two groups increasingly involved being students and young professionals. The link between youth unemployment and youth crime rates is well established. In 2004, economist Steven Levitt analysed a wide range of data into the relationship and found that, controlling for other factors, almost every study showed a relationship between non-violent crime and the rate of unemployment. Levitt’s estimate was that a 1% increase in unemployment would cause a 1% increase in crime. In 2005, a study by the government’s Social Exclusion Unit found that nearly two-thirds of young offenders were unemployed at the time of arrest compared to 46% of those aged over 25. The latest figures from the Office of National Statistics reveal that youth unemployment is at a 20-year high, with more than one in five — 22.3% of 16 to 24-year-olds — out of work. More than two fifths of those out of work have been unemployed for more than six months. As a result, many are anticipating a sharp increase in the level of crime committed by young people and this appears to be borne out in the increase seen in organised fraud. Strain on finances There is also a suggestion that issues such as a rise in tuition fees for higher education and lack of availability of affordable housing is putting such a strain on young people in jobs and full-time education that many are now willing to take the risk of committing fraud to survive. In many cases, this is a last resort unlikely to be taken under normal economic circumstances, but which is now being used as an opportunity by the criminal gangs who recruit fraudsters. To make significant amounts of money from fraud, the criminals need to recruit willing volunteers to file bogus claims in exchange for a share of the pay-out. The most common scenario — that used by Mohammed Patel, the fraudster jailed in 2009 for causing 93 crashes — is for a fraudster to use a contact’s car, with their permission, to stage a collision on the road, following which the owner of the car can make a large claim for personal injuries. However, as insurers’ risk and fraud managers have increasingly grown wise to this and subjected claims from the most commonly affected postcodes to increased scrutiny, the gangs have shifted their recruitment strategies. There have been a number of cases of active recruitment of fraudsters in universities – with those taking part often studying for high-earning professions such as law or medicine, and coming from stable, middle-class backgrounds. In one case currently under investigation, the ringleader at the centre of the scam was a student who had crashed the cars of a number of fellow students in order for them to benefit from the pay-outs. So, what can insurers do to stop these practices? Rapid shifts In the face of such rapid shifts in the demographics of those involved in fraud rings — and the state of the economy driving people to turn to desperate measures and commit fraud for the first time — it is clear that concentrating on those with a history of suspect claims will not prove an effective deterrent. What is needed are all-encompassing fraud detection tools and techniques, based on a joined-up approach to sharing detailed information both internally in organisations and between insurers. Ideally, as soon as a potential fraud ring is uncovered, investigators should be able to cross-reference the details of the claims involved with all other relevant cases across the industry as a whole in order to identify and investigate any links. Investment in analytical techniques and technology, coupled with an open approach to sharing data on suspected fraud rings, is essential if the industry is to stand any chance of identifying and bringing to justice those at the heart of the problem.

Read More

Banks forced to hand back £1.9BILLION to customers

 

Banks have been forced to hand back £1.9billion to customers who were wrongly sold Payment Protection Insurance as part of a 'loan protection racket'. However, consumer groups have accused the finance giants of dragging their feet on refunds which, eventually, could top £8billion. The Financial Ombudsman Service is receiving a staggering 1,000 complaints a day about the mis-selling of PPI. Consumers have a right to take a claim for a refund to the watchdog where they feel they have been unfairly fobbed off by their bank. In total, the ombudsman service has received over a third of a million PPI complaints, with the majority related to policies sold by banks alongside credit cards and loans. The watchdog upholds around three out of four cases in the consumer’s favour, with the average pay-out running at £2,750. The failure to offer speedy refunds has allowed a raft of hard-sell claims management firms, who are looking to cash in on the scandal, to flourish. These firms are spending millions of pounds in advertising to offer to pursue refunds. This involves bombarding the nation with TV advertising and recorded message telephone calls to both landline and mobile phones.

Read More

Investment Bankers Get Payouts Ahead Of Expected Loss Announcement

 

Royal Bank of Scotland is to pay out just under £400m in bonuses to its investment banking staff for their work in 2011, according to Sky sources. The day before RBS announces its full-year results, the bank is understood to have agreed with the Government that it can pay out between £390m and £400m in bonuses this year. The bonus pool, revealed exclusively by Sky News City editor Mark Kleinman, is likely to further stoke recent controversy over banker pay. The pot represents a cut of about 60% on last year's investment bank bonuses at RBS, which is 82% owned by the taxpayer. It comes as the bank prepares to report an expected full-year loss of up to £2bn, making the prospect of the taxpayer breaking even on the £45bn investment made in RBS during the 2008 banking crisis as remote as ever. The rewards follow a year in which thousands of employees were made redundant as Stephen Hester, the bank's chief executive, accelerated a restructuring of the business. Despite the reduction in the overall bonus pot, scores of RBS bankers are expected to collect packages worth more than £1m. The biggest payouts will be largely paid in shares and deferred over a three-year period. Ministers have insisted that RBS enforces a £2,000 cap on the cash element of bonuses for the third successive year. Angela Knight, chief executive of the British Bankers Association, defended the latest RBS payouts, saying bonuses for investment bankers were set according to the international market. RBS boss Stephen Hester caved into pressure to waive his 2011 bonus She told Sky News that if UK banks failed to compete with global compensation levels they would lose the best employees, and in the case of RBS this could damage the long-term interest for the taxpayer. The bonus revelation came as Sir Philip Hampton, RBS's chairman, claims in a Sky News documentary with Jeff Randall, that the era of big banking bonuses is over. A YouGov poll for Sky News also showed that three-quarters of people believe that bosses at Britain's state-backed banks should not receive a bonus. Mr Hester waived his £1m bonus several weeks ago, while Antonio Horta-Osorio, chief executive of Lloyds Banking Group, also decided to rule out receiving a bonus. The 2011 pool is the lowest awarded to RBS's investment bankers since the bank was rescued by taxpayers in 2008.

Read More

Bailed out banks now worth HALF £1,000 per person cost of saving them as they get ready to report £6BILLION losses

Bailed-out banks worth just HALF the £1,000 it cost each person to save them - as they get ready to admit £6BILLION losses RBS cost £45.5bn to bailout but the stake is now worth just £26bn £20bn paid to bailout Lloyds but shareholding is now worth HALF But executive pay has soared and Lloyds boss Antonio Horta-Osorio entitled to £3.46m a year Comments (14) Share The bailed out banks are now worth just over half the £1,000 per person cost of saving them - and are set to reveal combined losses of £6billion. Royal Bank of Scotland and Lloyds received a total of £65.5bn of taxpayers' money - but the Government stake is now worth just £36bn. Their are fears it will be years before the share price rises and taxpayers can get their money back. Bumper pay: Stephen Hester (left), who hates this picture being used, is paid £1.2million a year and waived a near-£1m bonus. Fred Goodwin, right, received £4.2m in 2007 But despite their poor performance the pay of top bankers like disgraced RBS boss Fred 'the Shred' Goodwin and Stephen Hester has rocketed over the last decade.   More... Three of the UK's five largest banks have lost shareholders' money over past decade while bosses reap rewards £500 for EVERY British household: UK faces added £1billion bill to bail out Greece and save crisis-hit euro Don't tell Sid! How the bank shares wipeout hit the savings of the windfall generation Fred Goodwin saw his total pay rocket from £1.27m in 2000 to £4.2m in 2007 - when he received a £2.86m performance-related bonus. Stress: Antonio Horta-Osorio is entitled to £3.46million this year Since 2000, the value of the bank has fallen by 91 per cent. New boss Stephen Hester enjoys a £1.2m salary and only waived a £963,000 shares bonus after being put intense pressure. However, he is still in line to receive shares worth about £660,000 that were awarded as part of the £2m bonus he was handed for his 2010 performance. But as the bosses receive bumper rewards, RBS has announced that 3,500 jobs will go on top of 2,000 which went last summer. Lloyds has more than tripled the amount it pays its chief executive over the past decade. Over the same period the average UK wage increased by just under 40 per cent, to £26,135. In 2000, they paid £856,000 to former boss Sir Peter Ellwood. New chief-executive Antonio Horta-Osorio is entitled to £3.46m this year, although he waived his £1.06m bonus last month. He had six weeks off work at the end of last year because of stress and fatigue. Tomorrow RBS will announce losses of around £2bn while Lloyds is expected to reveal losses of £3.5 billion on Friday. They will blame the poor figures on the eurozone debt crisis and increased regulation. Plans to give the shares directly to taxpayers to ease some of the public anger about the pay enjoyed by bailed-out bankers are reported to have been ditched because the investments are too shaky. Bailed out: Royal Bank of Scotland is set to announce losses of £3.5bn on Friday. It is worth £26bn - and the Government paid £45.5bn The Government injected £45.5bn to take an 82 per cent stake in RBS but those shares are today worth around £26bn despite a 40 per cent rise in the share price in recent weeks. It needs shares, which are currently trading at about 28p, to rise to 50p before it can break even. Lloyds cost £20bn to bailout - but the Government is currently nursing losses of nearly £10billion. Their shares are valued at around 35p and they must rise to 63p. The bank recoveries have been made more difficult because the Government has announced new regulations in a bid to prevent a repeat of the financial crisis. They will be forced to separate their retail and investment banking arms which will be expensive to implement and hit profits. The current malaise in the world economy and the Greek debt crisis has added to banks’ woes. The Government is paying £500 million a year in interest payments on the money it borrowed to bailout the banks. 'BAILED OUT BANKERS SHOULD NOT RECEIVE A BONUS' Three out of four people think bosses at bailed-out banks should not get a bonus, according to research. And 58 per cent of respondents to the YouGov poll, commissioned by Sky News, said Britain’s business reputation is being damaged by the actions of bankers. Sir Philip Hampton, chairman of the Royal Bank of Scotland, said bonuses cannot continue at the current level. 'Part of the reason for the pay is that the profits were not sustainable,' he told Sky news. 'They were there for a few years but they were not sustainable and the pay moved up to that level of profits and it now needs to be corrected down.' Sir Philip turned down a £1.4 million bonus earlier this month. But Nigel Rudd, former deputy chairman of Barclays, claimed he would have paid more money to Barclays’ former chief executive John Varley. He said: 'Bob Diamond (current chief executive) and John Varley made a huge difference to Barclays as they went through this terrible period. 'You realise Barclays never made a loss throughout all this period? I think John Varley was underpaid actually ... because I think what he did throughout that crisis was phenomenal.' The comments come after weeks of conflict over bankers’ bonuses, in which RBS chief Stephen Hester turned down his £963,000 bonus amid mounting pressure and Lloyds boss Antonio Horta-Osorio waived his payout following a leave of absence.

Read More