Allister responds to PMS package
08 April 2011
“Whereas the administrator’s package is clearly better than what liquidation would offer, it does not alter the fact that, despite all the hype and promise of no British saver losing from the banking crisis, in fact PMS savers will. Causing me to ask why the Stormont Executive did not even seek to negotiate from the Treasury an amount sufficient to meet the losses, never mind interest losses?
“The Treasury insists it has contributed all it was asked for, so why was a shortfall built into the negotiating demand? This suggests, at least, carelessness and neglect on behalf of those entrusted with this vital task. When we add to this the utterly unjustified insistence by Stormont that their £25m – unlike Westminster’s – must be repaid, then Stormont’s contribution is in fact NIL. This is a particularly grasping by DETI, a department whose acquiescence in the regulatory gap gave rise to the crisis and whose feet-dragging has left these British savers without access to their money for over two and a half years.”
