2

long_way_away

Oh and if you would like to see a more “scathing personal attack” than an email from one person to another, how about calling someone “deeply unsettled and emotional’ in a newspaper?

Report abuse

4

Gary Blanchford

Long-way-away, easy to hide behind pseudo names and attack others. If you note the facts, the first attack came from Mr Niven via the Guernsey press on the 25th November 2009, titled “Why let the facts get in the way of prejudice?”. Hardly what you would expect from a professional person just prior to an important debate. The proposer of the amendment was Deputy Rhoderick Matthews and knowing Deputy Dudley-Owen I am quite sure that she was up to speed on the matter but asking questions up to the last minute surely forms part of a Deputies duty in arriving at all the facts. It is perfectly obvious by the outcome of the debate and the tiny difference between those who voted for, 21, and those against Rhoderick Matthews amendment 26, that there was considerable worry in the house as to the committment of about 70% of taxpayers money, compared with the amendment’s suggestion of approx 50/50. This alone showed the amendment to be well worth while debating. Deputy Dudley-Owen was quite right to mention the e-mail that she had received around 0100hrs on the same morning as the debate from MrPeter Niven and to prove that point she has since received a sincere apology through Deputy carla McNulty-Bauer on behalf of Guernsey Finance who will be bringing the matter up before their committee. Mr Niven is apparently away and cannot be contacted. Possibly Long-way-away. I as a tax payer and applaud the efforts by Deputy Matthews and Dudley-Owen in attempting to get a fairer deal for the taxpayer. Its a pity more deputies are not like minded.

Report abuse

6

David

Stephen
I have and it doesn’t change my opinion as we have so many idiots in the States that its not surprising that the likes of Peter Niven get so exasperated if that’s who he has to work for. But yes, my apologies to Deputy Gloria Dudley-Owen. It was wrong of me to single her out from a considerably larger group.

I’m not condoning what Peter Niven said or how it was said, but I think I can well understand his thought process.

Report abuse

8

Arnald

Stephen John
Considering the threats I consistently receive by David (I may of couse be wong considering the pseudonyms) I can only concur.

I hope he follows them up. Then it will show him up as a baseless apologist for everything I’ve said, and been proved correct about the nature of his business.

For the record, I reckon him to be an absolutely upstanding member of the business. But that does not absolve him for defending an arrogant and misinformationist. OED, I hope you’re listening, it’s a good word.

I’ve read nearly every public Nivenism I can find on the web.

If I’m wrong I’m happy to apologise, since losing what I have is like losing nothing.

Report abuse

10

David

Arnald
What on earth are you talking about ?

Long_way_away
I totally agree with you.

Report abuse

12

Pete Burtensahw

Peter Niven should resign. His attack on a Deputy for requesting info is out of order. It shows how much power crazy little men have and how they shape our political landscape for their greater good and not the islands. Stand your ground Deputy Gloria Dudley-Owen and don’t be bullied by these idiots…….

Report abuse

14

valeite

Oh dear oh dear what is this world coming to. As much as I think perhaps Mr. Niven was being a little harsh on Deputy Dudley Owen, and should not have said that to the GP, if we all had to apologise for things we have said and called deputies we could fill the GP many times over with apologies. I think you have to be a little more thick skinned than that to be a deputy, particularly at the moment when they are getting the blame for everything bad that happens, like everything in life there are good and bad amongst them.

Report abuse

16

Arnald

David

“Helluva job”, eh?

Tell that to those folk that won’t be able to afford their bills when GST comes in, and those whose services will be cut because of that man’s lobbying power. And there he goes bleating to all and sundry because he doesn’t like questions from an elected representative.

The airport firefighters do a ‘helluva job’. Look at the flak they get whenever any opportunity for sticking the boot in happens. Niven self-promotes.

Guernsey is practically bankrupt and that deficit is not going to get smaller by sacking a few public sector employees.

“Helluva job”?

Report abuse

18

Arnald

David
Are you serious: “independent external reports (Edwards, IMF, FATF, Foot etc).”
Independent?
Dear oh dear.

The problem is that expectations for Guernsey have been raised by an immoral business, just as it has for the non residents throughout history. The locals have always been overlooked. Private healthcare does not benefit the poor. Raising taxes for the sake of appeasement does not benefit the poor. Pumping sewage into the sea does not benefit anyone. Building an ‘EfW’ (seriously, how much energy will be needed to keep the thing alight in the first place to make it run efficiently) doesn’t benefit anyone. Having companies that network around the secrecy jurisdictions that own treasured buildings, institutions, sports grounds and political parties overseas benefits no one.

Except for the likes of Niven, and you, presumably. Your hubris knows no bounds. Your contribution to the false aspirations to the local population is based on electronic abstraction.

There is nothing real about your business. It serves no social use. At least the privateers of the past brought in real goods. We are just a booking centre for tax dodgers.

Now it’s India. Where 0.00001% of the population produce 20% of their GDP. Are the poor there getting any benefit? No. It is all being stashed in operations like oours.

That’s not business, that advertising theft. Look at Dubai. Do you like it their? Do you get treated like a king? More tea, wallah?

So you can tell me that Niven is doing his job well, and I will tell you that he is doing untold damage to real people in real poverty, with no representation, whilst he mouths off to the people that pay him.

Who cares if the pollies are ‘idiots’ (honestly David, you must have voted for them and if you didn’t you cannot make such an insulting claim), he should shut up and provide the information.

Don’t you think he had an obligation to assist in lobbying for the disproportionate benefits your kind get from the good people of Guernsey? His ‘helluva job’ would be pretty ‘helluva a waste of space’ if he didn’t.

Odious argument from an increasingly despised industry. I’d get out and let the ‘adaptable’ locals find something else before the riots start.

Report abuse

20

Bob

If we, the finance sector benefit so much from GF, surely a 50% increase in the proposed per capita fee is rather small in the scheme of things?
I suspect that Niven is concerned that the result of the careful research showed that many of us in finance do not think that we are getting value for money. Do I think I get my £75 pounds worth?
No. Would I tolerate that level of charge? Not big enough to waste time arguing over. £110 – again, not value, but I’m likely to start resisting. GFSC are experiencing some resistance to their own proposed increases, and Niven will probably know that, too.
From the states perspective, it would be better for GF to be purely funded by the finance sector, and only by those that really benefit. The per capita basis isn’t too bad, but I’m certainly against their fees being compulsory, or funded by any compulsory contribution through GFSC fees, tax or anything else.

Report abuse

22

David

Arnald
You are really trying my patience now, but that’s clearly your intention.
So on Planet Arnald (that’s beyond Mars by the way), which is clearly occupied exclusively by the very muppets that you suggest, the IMF, the FATF, Edwards and Foot are all to be ignored. On what grounds ? That they are all “in on it”, whatever “it” is ? That Arnald would be a more appropriate independent reviewer ? Strangely enough, they actually know what they are talking about, which I would have thought was a distinct advantage. And who do you think appointed them ? It certainly wasn’t Guernsey. Are you saying that every report issued by any external body which doesn’t say exactly what Arnald wants it to say is complete fabrication ?
I must get my dictionary out and check the meaning of “naive”. It obviously means something very different on Planet Arnald to what it does elsewhere.

Report abuse

24

Arnald

Stephen, I commend your temperance.
Foot worked for the FSA that designed the regime that allowed the financial fiasco to happen. He already knew exactly how Guernsey works. His remit was to highlight that the obvious T&C’s issues and the public ignorance of BVI was incomparable to the mirrors in the Channel, where countless Lords and Ladies, MPs, business moguls and the real string pullers base their power. It’s a bit like saying that Lord Ashdown, or the disgraced Alan Stanford had nothing to do with Belize or Antigua.

The soft language in the Foot report hides massive failures. WE ARE ONLY PARTIALLY COMPLIANT WITH INTERNATIONAL CDD. AT BEST!!!That’s not something to shout from the roof tops.

Yet despite the obvious incestuous relationships our ‘reviewers’ have with the ‘Establishment’ here, we are mugged into believing that it smells of roses.

Now let’s have a look at the accountancy firms, their control of IASB, their control of FATF and their record in monitoring and auditing the massive failures that have cost the global population trillions.

Shall we?

Where do you want me to start?

Enron?
Iceland?
Lehman’s?

Every single money sapping, inequality raising, business failing enterprise has been overlooked by a few companies. Those companies provide the staff that write the rules, that monitor the rules and that regulate their impositions.

David either knows nothing about causality and corruption, or is deliberately trying to rubbish my obviously superior knowledge of these subjects.

India? Co-operation with our more corrupt neighbours, Jersey in India?
Google Satyam. See PwC.

What about Landsbanki Gsy? Who was looking at that? Who in Iceland? Who in the UK? How can he possibly say what he says?

Stephen John, I know you are meticulous, and I also recognise my language is inflammatory, but I make no excuses for this, David has never backed up any of his ‘Planet Arnald’ comments over three years with any detail or fact,

Desperate stuff, I’m afraid.

Report abuse

26

David

Arnald

Your “obviously superior knowledge of these subjects” is absolutely overwhelming. If you’re that deluded that you are right then there’s really no point in me shattering your delusion. You just carry on thinking that way. If that helps you to cope with life as you prefer on Planet Arnald, then that’s absolutely fine with me. However, I’ve decided that I’d rather carry on living alongside those on Planet Earth who for some reason I tend not to fall out with anywhere near so often.

I suspect that I won’t miss the bizarre but all-too-frequent feeling that I’ve walked in halfway through an episode of the Twilight Zone.

Report abuse

28

Stephen John

David

You all to willingly accuse Arnald of being provocative.

In the last 12 years things have changed NuLabour may not be so supportative of tax havens, at least not on the surface. There is however substantial evidence to show that their bark is worse that their bite. City of London Delaware and all that.

Incredibly as it might seem, politicians often say one thing and mean another!!! Perhaps some might be beneficiaries of tax havens!!!

Report abuse

30

Stephen John

David

Surprising as this will be to you, some of your posts might be seen as provocative both in content and manner, specially when you disagree with the other side of the argument.

Report abuse

32

Arnald

Unfortunately for apologists of tax abuse, such as ‘David’ and STEP and Foot and Edwards and the vagueness of the GFSC, IASB and their control of FATF, and those local politicians that ‘understand’ the role of the industry by attending GIBA ‘educational’ seminars, their opinions fly in the face of the real world.

It is not ‘Planet Arnald’ that is deluded. It is the nonsense that is plastered all over the web as the shadow banking industry as ‘beneficial’.

I am STILL waiting for some facts from independent research that is not connected to the hated Murphy and ATTAC and TJN and Christian Aid, and the Archbishops of the CofE and the (personally unliked) RC leaders, and the UK Monarchy, and the majority of professors, academics and researchers that disbelieve every single word that the likes of ‘David’ continually spout off.

I notice that a letter I wrote to the Press rubbishing the nonsense and lies given top column inches by another apologist, Jack Irvine, acting for the Cayman premier has not been published, whilst ream after ream of conspirational nonsense by Matt Waterman et al about the EU project (have they noticed in their research that the US economy was built around Nazi tech and knowledge) is treated with reverence, maybe to appease D Jones’ misguided and hypocritical support for UKIP.

David, you do not answer questions, you respond with insults.

Do you not promote ways to circumvent UK tax laws? I know the answer. Are you brave enough to admit it?

Dave Jones would.

Report abuse

34

Arnald

Yep, Phil. Damn right. Another apologist.

Do your own research and see what you come up with. I’ve done mine.

Once again, are you telling me that the NGOs on the frontline are all wrong?

Who’s being outlandish: you in your cosy cottage in cossetted Guernsey, or the people struggling to help people aspire to our way of life?

Report abuse

36

TL

David, Phil, I’d give up if I were you. I have.

No matter what you say, Arnald will accuse you of arrogance and greed, despite clearly not understanding what it is that he is criticising.

I do find it ironic that he can accuse others of arrogance and yet not see that it is extreme arrogance for him to simply assume that he is always right and refuse to acknowledges that the “apologists” might actually know what they are talking about.

Similarly, he can accuse others of not answering questions whilst wilfully ignoring those put to him. I call that arrogance.

Report abuse

38

TL

Arnald

I will make one point to you. You have asked for someone to prove you wrong (in what i wonder?)

But I have noticed that in a previous post above you stated:

“The soft language in the Foot report hides massive failures. WE ARE ONLY PARTIALLY COMPLIANT WITH INTERNATIONAL CDD. AT BEST!!!”

As you well know, we discussed this on a previous thread and I pointed out to you that this statement did not relate to Guernsey.

And yet to persist in ignoring that fact and still throw around an accusation even though it has been shown to be false.

That is an example of you ignoring the evidence put to you. It is also an example of you being wrong.

Report abuse

40

Arnald

7.18 foot report. It applied to all the jurisdictions.
And i KNOW IT’S TRUE BECAUSE I WORKED IN THE BLONEY BANKS.

Report abuse

42

Phil

Arnald

I have neither the time nor the inclination to attempt to start disproving negatives. I (unlike you it would appear) do not have unlimited time to spend on expansive diatribes.

Perhaps I ought to get a job in the public sector, the lack of commercial pressure would enable me to take a much larger role in this type of forum.

Report abuse

44

TL

Oh dear Arnald, you really must read things properly:

7.13 and 7.14 make it clear that Guernsey was excluded from that aspect of the review. Foot did not conduct his own review, but was merely collating the results of FATF/CFATF/IMF reviews.

You used to work in a bank – great. However, as you are aware (because I have told you before), CCD requirements have been strengthened throughout the world in recent years. Our requirements in particular have been strengthened. I have said before and will say again that my experience of working in London and Guernsey is that our requirements are now more stringent than the UK’s, and are more closely monitored than in the UK. So your experience is out of date.

But I guess you will ignore that too.

Report abuse

46

Arnald

TL
I know full well, and you are being disingenuous. Fiddling tax is wrong.

Report abuse

48

Arnald

No TL. Intermediary CDD can be accepted by recommendation from another jurisdiction.
That is inadequate according to the FATF wording, which is vague, I agree.
If we are accepting that CDD from the likes of CHF and Caymanthen we have no real proof to its veracity.

Report abuse

50

TL

Arnald – disingenuous? which statement are you referring to

As for CDD, you were using the Foot report to back you up, when the quotation you used does not support that. That is what I was challenging. I assume you now accept that it does not say what you thought?

As for accepting intermediary CDD, we can only accept it if the intermediary and their own AML procedures have been verified. In the UK it can be accepted from Tom Dick or Harry.

I doubt that there are many (if any) countries that are fully FATF compliant. The key is that we should be substantially compliant and amongst the most compliant, which I believe we are. I certainly believe that we are more compliant than the UK or US.

Report abuse

52

Arnald

*sigh*
Yes it does TL, simply by implication. Jersey got a ‘glowing report’ from the IMF, and Foot says it is partially compliant at best. Now I wonder what the IMF will say about us next year?

As for Intermediary CDD, signing off millions of pounds worth of loans on the basis that someone’s uncle once worked for a company that the WM used to do business with and so can be ‘assured’ that the venture is kosher, whether aan illegal West Bank settlement or a ruthless take over of a perfectly functional retail business in France, is simply not good enough. It happens all the time, a badly photocopied passport, a certified sig from a lawyer from god knows where, and a personal recommendation from a geezer that’s been bankrupted in the past is good enough for many organisations here. Box. Tick. Box. Tick.

Have you seen the Notts County ownership structure? How many hoops-a-jumped and whistleblowers had to collate that information.

This is your world. Deceipt.

Just because we may be marginally ‘better’ than other despicable places, doesn’t make us acceptable. Read on McDuff, on the Foot Report about transparency.

David, yeah they do. You hate it because you can’t prove me wrong.

Report abuse

54

Arnald

Phil
But that’s not a fact. I can prove it if you like. Test me.

Report abuse

56

Phil

Arnald

Question 1 – would an idiot bite the hand that feeds them?

Report abuse

58

Arnald

Phil
No an idiot wouldn’t. An idiot would blindly do anything they are told as long as they could buy trinkets. An idiot would believe the rubbish that TL and David ‘say’. I’ve still to see a verifiable fact from them, just ad honinem attacks. Notice there are NO answers to any of my questions.

We provide a valid service for some necessary international transactions. Most of it is just tax fiddling.

That is immoral. An idiot dismisses immorality in order to make their lives bearable. An idiot attacks the questioner without doing any research.

Are you truly saying that if immoral tax avoidance schemes were monitored and transparent, and illegal tax evasion and laundering abolished through the introduction of transparency laws, that our entire industry would evaporate overnight? It sounds like you are.

Now tell me, why would it if we are ‘the best’?

The idiot believes falsehoods. You believe I am biting the hand that feeds me. I say I am voicing concern about the morality and legitimacy of our primary industry. There is a great deal of evidence to support my ‘delusions’. There is nothing but back-rubbing in defence.

The idiot cannot make things up, nor create.

Who is the idiot? Me or you?

I asked a question of a Deputy; “Do you know what the finance industry does?” on the Sunday phone in. He said “Yes, because I have attended every GIBA seminar and it’s perfectly fine.”

Think about it. The idiot believes what he is being told by the people that make the hay while the sun is shining.

I could ask “Do you know what the drug dealer does?” and they could answer “Yes, because I’ve attended an open day at a crack house, the carpets were clean and the folk were very friendly.”

Funny that.

The idiot would conclude that crack dealers were fine upstanding fellows based on the crack dealer’s selling spiel. The idiot would not ask what crack is, it’s biological contra-indications and the global trade in coca derived products.

J’accuse, ‘Phil’, ‘David’ and ‘TL’ and most of all ‘greg’.

Next question please. I’m enjoying it.

TL
What are you trying to say? The Foot report quite clearly shares the concerns of ‘the NGOs’, and then Covers its A** by saying petutulantly that other places do the same thing. Which is all you do.

I don’t live in those ‘other places’, nor do my children. I don’t want them growing think that what the majority of our money is derived from is the calculated deprivation of other countries.

This is not a conspiracy theory, but widely reported fact. Get used to it because it will become more widespread, your businesses will become more loathed and the questions will become more searching.

Why can’t you answer any of them? The best I get is “can’t be bothered”.

Like sulking teenagers.

Report abuse

60

Arnald

TL
Many UK forums, thanks, and a couple of US ones. But they are obnoxious libertarian right wing sites. I am a natural masochist.

Report abuse

62

David

Did anyone see that bizarre letter in the Press yesterday from “laurence” ? Interesting to know who he is because it looked to me like it might have been written by Richard Murphy of TJN using “laurence” as a front.
It picked up on a few points made by Jack Irvine a week or so earlier. I think Irvine referred to Tax Justice Network being run from a faceless cottage in Norfolk whereas I think Irvine was getting mixed up with Murphy’s Tax Research “business”, which is very closely aligned with Tax Justice Network.
What was really interesting was that “laurence/Murphy” was trying the tried and tested tactic of asking people to prove a negative. Very difficult that. Imagine being able to wildly accuse somebody in an article of, say, being a paedophile and insisting that XYZ proves that he isn’t. Impossible. Which is why the onus is on the accuser to back up his claim (or to be liable for defamation). Its no different from the finance industry. Individuals can make wild, unsubstantiated claims, throw them into the media like a hand grenade, and demand that the finance industry proves them wrong. Its not possible to prove a negative and “laurence”/Murphy well know that. And of course they will say that if there was total transparency to the public then it would be provable, knowing only too well that such information will never be available to the public because of the right to privacy, enabling them to continue with their very tired line of attack.
Ultimately its impossible for anyone to win such an argument, but the likes of “laurence”/Murphy will always claim that to be an emphatic victory which (in their view)fully endorses their wild claims, just because its impossible to prove a negative.

Report abuse

64

Lawrence

I am no front for anyone.
What a ridiculous post from David.
Irvine got his facts wrong and it was published in the public domain. I merely responded to his points.
Not unsubstantiated and I see you carry on with this ‘prove negative’ line that is absurd at best, and plainly ignorant. If you were transparent you could prove the claims wrong.

You are not so the accusations are valid.

Report abuse

66

Arnald

Phil
Fancy an arm wrestle?

Report abuse

68

David

Lawrence
I only know where Richard Murphy lives because he actually states it on the home page of his Tax Research website and has referred to it in various postings!
Its a remarkable “coincidence” that Lawrence has suddenly made an appearance to help back up Arnald. Where has Lawrence been all this time?

Report abuse

70

Arnald

Your House
Your Road
Your Town
Yorkshire

I’m here all week.

Report abuse

72

bcb

Steven
Very good points made there.
My father had a big family, supported my mum and managed to buy 2 properties for renovating. Paid of the loan and we all felt much better off than we do today. Some people will have us believe the only thing in life that matters is money when most know it isn`t.

I also agree with a lot of what Arnald says and think he is far nearer the truth than those protecting the shady practices of the finance industry. I mean what else would they say? And if Arnald is so wrong then why does he say the things he does as it`s not like he`s got much to gain from it?. Some wealthy people put a lot of effort into avoid paying taxes (i know a good few myself) so anyone who thinks this whole industry is “clean” is more deluded than those who accuse Arnald of knowing nothing.
It`s not wealth creation it`s just distribution from the poor to the rich.

Report abuse

74

Arnald

Thank you bcb
And I do know what I’m talking about. Enough for me to get stalked.

Report abuse

76

Phil

Arnald

Sorry, just got back from lunch, it is Friday after all.

I’m sure that oiling your biceps will be worthwhile, just imagine how good you’ll look to yourself in the mirror later, whilst spouting your usual nonsense to the only audience that will listen.

Report abuse

78

Phil

Your “arguments”!! I’d call them wild, broad sweeping claims and accusations with very little basis in fact, made with the intention of attempting (and I do stress the word attempting) to make it look as if you are some kind of authority on tax matters.

It is impossible to counter your “arguments” as you never listen to reason (David has tried in vain several times to open your eyes to the facts, sadly with no success).

You just carry on spending several hours each day posting on various sites.

Report abuse

80

Smudger

@Arnald
There’s one reference here to one case from 2005 (Anglo Leasing) which seems to be allegations. I cannot find any reference to anybody having been found guilty of any offence although it doesn’t look great involving offshore involvement. Did it ever go to court ?But that’s one single case 4 years ago. How many more have involved Guernsey (as opposed to other offshore jurisdictions) and what is the “incident rate” relative to the size of the Guernsey offshore finance industry. It is surely of no surprise to anyone that in the past 5-10 years stuff has emerged from structures which were set up many years earlier when standards were admittedly much lower. How many crooks have actually been caught as a result of STRs filed by Guernsey financial services businesses over the past 5-10 years ? The odd case amongst a very large industry does not indicate that it is typical of Guernsey’s industry today. I know for a fact that the standards of Guernsey’s finance industry today is incomparable with what used to go in the 70s and 80s and even up to the mid-90s, but that was 15 years ago. How much of that old stuff is still hanging around ? I would imagine that most of it was either scared off by 2000/2001 AML regulations or was reported under STRs.
Kaupthing was an Isle of Man bank – nowt to do with Guernsey. All in all I wouldn’t exactly call that strong evidence of Guernsey’s finance industry being full of criminal activity today.
A bit like saying that Germany today is full of Nazis!

Report abuse

82

Arnald

Smudger
Look at the names of the Kaupthing board members, look at the list of loans to those board members, and then see what those loans were used for and where they were administered.
We are heavily implicated.
Re Anglo Leasing, because of the work by an underling at the bank, it was reported to the right people and an investigation was begun, both here and by the SFO. We acted correctly, but only because the wrong person in the affair made the request for the cash. If Kamani had not issued the request, it would have happily passed compliance.
Well done to the lad involved, butg not well done to the structure that supported it, knowing what it was, and gaining personal profit from its actions.

Incidentally the SFO case only halted this year because of the corrupt Kenyan government refusal to co-operate. No real surprises there.

These types of accounts are rife all through the Guernsey system, probably not as bad as Jersey, I say probably I mean definitely.

We ARE better than the rest, but that does not mean it is satisfactory.

TIEA arrangements are next to useless, the sytems being proposed are so watered down that for the campaigners for truth will be dissatisfied. But tiny steps start big leaps.

I am shocked by the responses that imply that Guernsey will implode if it becomes clean. It means those people know that it isn’t.

You can prove a negative; open up. Let the HMRC (in particular) sift through the accounts and make their minds up about what’s fait and what’s not.

Why the resistance?

Why the attacks on someone who cares about people?

Losing my girlfriend because she works in a bank is one thing, but the liars that promote tax abuse are more important than my personal emotions. I call that bravery.

Paul
Thank you. There are a great many ‘entertaining’ things that get (rightly) edited out for their content. But I am funny.

And that’s not my usual modesty, but it warrants a self boost when I get vocal support.

I apologise to the guy in the pub last night, which I doubt reads any of this, but I care. Something that lacks in Guernsey it would seem.

If anyone can point me to where I can contact Dean Mellor so that I can correspond with him about his role within Christian Aid, I would be most grateful. His ‘robustness’ comments about the CA UK are of deep concern to me, coming from the head of the CofG.

my email address is
scooter@cwgsy.net
if anyone wants to take the debate off these boards, which I know must be tedious to the apathetic.

What’s brown and sticky?

Parcel tape.

I’m still here all week.

Report abuse

84

Stephen John

Well said Mr Smudger “They would move their accounts from Guernsey like a shot because privacy is important to a lot of people”

Privacy equals secrecy. At last someone honest enough to accept that secrecy and privacy are bedfellows

Report abuse

86

Bob

UK can put it’s own house in order before I lose a moment’s sleep over a few quid it failed to collect in tax because it got its own laws all loopholey.
As to criminality, what am I supposed to worry about? More people are killed by perfectly legal drugs than illegal. Foreign despots, even within the EC make their own laws, without censure or much international comment.
We all have a unique sense of morality. As the victor writes history; the politically correct write and impose their over-sentimentalised claptrap on the rest of us. But they happily live off us like parasites.
Is the grocer now to interrogate every customer as to their source of funds before providing food to them? Hardly.
All of us use services locally, which by Arnald’s argument are largely funded by criminality and tax avoidance laundered through the collection of taxes and other charges from the immoral finance industry or funded by the expenditure of its employees.

Report abuse

88

Steven

Smudger. What would be the problem with privacy? I’m sure all the employers of HMRC have signed confidentiality contracts.

Report abuse

90

Smudger

@Steven
That of course would be the very same HMRC who so ably demonstrated their ability to handle confidential data by leaving UK taxpayer data on a disk on a train ! Sorry, people will give HMRC whatever info they are oliged to give them and nothing more….Its human nature for people to want privacy and in my view they are fully entitled to it if they are not breaking any laws.

Report abuse

92

Stephen John

Smudger old dear, you shouldn’t get so uptight.

How on earth does does the fact that privacy can be interpreted as secrecy (see a thesaurus), equate to the content of your rant?

Sounds like protesting too much to me!!!

Still a good post showing just why tax havens and their attitudes and protestations of everlasting cleanliness and godliness need sorting out.

Report abuse

94

Paul

Phil
I think it is you that refuses to view things objectively. It is you that attempts to rubbish what Arnald has to say without presenting any real argument other than stating he is wrong and presenting him as a lone voice.

I completely agree with what he is saying and if you bother to read what he writes then you will quickly see he is happy to back up his claims with facts.

I have not once seen him run for cover or refuse to answer any points raised. Any chance in you, amongst others, showing the same amount of courtesy then?

He does not ask impossible questions. Only fair ones that deserve answers. I believe he has a hell of a lot more support that one would openly admit too. For one reason or another.

Maybe many have vested interests and would not wish to be seen publicly rejecting the hand that feeds them.

I think its very refreshing to have some one that is not scared to stand n be counted.

Go Arnald. Very good reading IMO!

Report abuse

96

Tom Wright

I have taken a very painful trip through these posts where arguments seemed to have wandered way out of sight of the subject matter – an apology from Niven to a deputy. A relatively innocuous non event to spawn such dramatic statements this way and that. Frankly I find it all china to a blood orange in reality. So much wasted hot air when you consider that we will all be pretty well stuffed when the force of the newly elected European Ministries as devised in the Lisbon Treaty is felt. We will surely have to look to our loins especially in the area of European intervention that seriously threatens the City of London’s hitherto unique position. Are we not likely to see those apron strings flutter away as on a balloon! This may satisfy some purists but many ordinary people are likely to suffer hardship and there is not a thing we can do. Perhaps the compliance environment where we feel we excell and proudly pay homage is merely a softening up process prior to total absorption? I hope I am just having a nightmare.

Report abuse

98

Arnald

Greg
Smudger
Phil
David
TL
Anyone

Prove me wrong.
You can’t.
So you are wrong to argue what you argue.
That puts you in the naughty corner for spreading lies about me.

With a dunce’s cap with an F for Failure.

If you are up there in the higher echelons of the finance industry then I worry for our future. yYou have no cogency, no back up, no integrity, and you tell blatant lies.

I do not wish my children to be poisoned by your actions. That is why I shout and shout and shout. Someone has to.

What do you get paid for apart from protecting criminality?

You really ought to be ashamed instead of rubbishing me.

Where are your facts? Still waiting….

Many thanks to Paul and Stephen John and Stephen for shining more light on their proclivities and non-statements.

I am retiring now, and yeah I do have a few screws loose. Caused by power, corruption and lies.

As Bart Simpson would say

Eat my shorts

available from a shop VERY near you.

Goodnight, sweet dreams, and I hope the bed bugs bite.

Report abuse

100

Phil

Arnald

It appears that the plot has been well and truly lost (by you I hasten to add).

I repeat, there is no point in arguing with someone who will not listen, who throws around allegations like confetti, who jumps from one issue to another by the minute, and last (but certainly not least) is clearly unhinged.

Report abuse

102

Bob

bcb – no sleep lost.
Go join an international brigade and overthrow a democratically elected despot if it bothers you. Arnald, Murphy and the PC mob will have you for an illegal coup attempt. Yet governments can press illegal and undemocratic wars without sanction.
It’s all hypocrisy, which was my point.
Niven and his spin men will cosy up to almost any regime in the hope of crumbs from their table. That is acceptable, as long as the regime isn’t on the sanctions list, and rich countries rarely are, because the older democracies are all broke.
We come under the spotlight because it is easier for UK to shine it on someone else, and preferably not that of someone bigger and harder than them, like the US. We have the same faults as they do – we are not unique – and in many cases we are less flawed. It makes no difference.
Tom – sense as usual.
Maybe we can export the compliance expertise, and put all of them out of business too?

Report abuse

104

TL

oh dear. with that last post Arnald seems to have crossed a line – especially when taken with his recent admission that he has lost a girlfriend and other friends over his fixation.

this is now becoming like the early stages of X Factor, where you realise that entertainment has become exploitation of people who are actually in need of help.

Report abuse

106

Arnald

HAR!
TL, you watch x factor!
good work.

Greg, are yo trying to appear stupid, or are you just stupid. I did counter the foot thing.

Jersey passed an IMF review with ‘flying colours’ (a dirty grey or green, aren’t they?), yet was found to be ‘partially compliant, at best’.

oh dear oh dear. No cogency

still waiting for some facts, bullyboys…

Report abuse

108

TL

Arnald – yes, I watch X Factor. Usually on a continuous loop over the internet throughout the night – it passes the time as I have found it hard to sleep since I became responsible for all of the world’s ills.

Report abuse

110

TL

Stephen John

You said: “The major weakness in the David, TL, Greg, Smudger approach is that they really believe that they are right and that their materialistic, “money is all approach” is the only valid view. They can believe that, but it does not mean that the other side of the coin – the moralist approach about tax havens, is not equally true. It just depends which on which side of the fence you sit.”

You are attributing attitudes to me that I do not have, and I can only assume that you have failed to follow the gist of what I have been saying. Which I find odd as often you are a “devil’s advocate” rational poster.

I certainly do not believe that my views or opinions are right – as there is no such thing as a “right” opinion on these matters.

If Arnald wished to argue that the finance industry is, in his view, bad then we could discuss the arguments for and against. I would have no problem with that if the points put forward by each side were respected and argued on merit.

What I do have a problem with is when Arnald presents his opinions as fact. He makes statements about what he believes and then asks us to prove him wrong. He says that X happens, when he is not in a position to know. When I am in a position to know (with reasonable certainty) that X does not happen (or I at least know that the system is not based on it happening – whereas Arnald accuses the industry of relying on X and accuses those of us in the industry of wilful criminal intent) then I explain my understanding of the situation.

Not once have I had my own experience taken on board by Arnald in preference to what he believes to be the case, based on received third-hand speculation. Instead, I get accused of being in denial, of being corrupt, of being arrogant.

I have never made a factual claim that I cannot justify based on my own first-hand experience. I have not claimed that the industry is perfect (no walk of life is). I have not claimed that we are single-handedly assisting the spread of life-improving technology around the world. I have simply disputed Arnald’s attempts to present his vision of the world (and of an industry that he patently does not have an intimuate knowledge of) to be the one true word.

To be honest I am beginning to feel sorry for him. He patently cannot move from his entrenched position. It would appear that it has had serious effects on his personal life and so I imagine that these posts are repeated in real life. If only he could calm down and rationally assess what people are telling him, rather than just accusing them of being wrong, in denial, etc then he might actually learn something about the one thing that he invests so much time in.

He would still be at liberty to say that he does not like the effect of the finance industry on the island or the world, but at least he would be basing his opinions on what actually happens.

Report abuse

112

Arnald

TL
I dispute your claim based on what I’ve seen, and what I still hear, in practice.

My argument follows the rules of philosophical argument.

You have no sense of the wider world and that of causality. Just because YOU are perfect doesn’t mean we are ALL perfect. You would also fail.

My arguments are also based on factual research using based references as can be got because of our secrecy position.

Your arguments are based on chums chatting about it. I know damn well how CDD works and you claim I do not. That is why j’accuse.

They are fact. I have seen the accounts, I have passed the entries, I know some of the business. I have seen other people who also work in the industry and my facts hold up.

The international standards are at fault by design. We are part of a global system of corruption that channels money from the poor to the rich.

It is your entrenched position and inability to counter any of my more serious arguments that make you look arrogant.

I have proved it time and again.

You have proved only one thing. You are an apologist for criminal behaviour.

Sorry, but that is the truth. If it weren’t you’d be explaining how you don’t apologise for evasion and hidden nominee acounts and incomplete CDD info.

Which I know exist.

Report abuse

114

Arnald

what reasoned argument?

“I say there is nothing wrong and we’re great” is not an argument.

Report abuse

116

Smudger

@Arnald
I can’t help agreeing with TL’s two posts, one to you and the other to Stephen on 8th December…It sums up the position perfectly. I am intrigued by your claim to have “passed the entries” etc in your post above…Just how long ago was that please as I can only conclude that you haven’t worked in the finance industry for many years, possibly even as far back as pre-AML days in 2000/2001 when, let’s be frank, things have changed massively since then….I feel that your “knowledge” is many, many years out of date which is a real pointer to you why so many posters on this thread aattack everything that you say…It is not representative of the Guernsey finance industry today. Yet you seem to persist with this demand that people who defend the industry should have to prove a negative. It isn’t possible and you know it….If I was to scandalously suggest that somebody was a paedophile, for example, I rather think that the onus is on me to prove it, rather than on the accused to disprove it. Indeed how would that person possibly disprove it? That’s why the legal system is based on people being innocent until proved guilty. Negatives cannot be proved…You make all these allegations that the finance industry here is crooked but you don’t prove that it is…You merely demand that anyone who disagrees with you proves that it isn’t but the ball must be in your court to prove that it is, and you can’t because it isn’t! Have you ever studied the law of defamation..If you make a false and damaging accusation and cannot prove it to be true then you will be sued for defamation (libel or slander)…It is not for the person accused by you to have to prove that that you are wrong because they cannot prove a negative…That line of argument from you is completely unsustainable and I genuinely believe that you have got this fixation in your head about the industry, perhaps from a decade or more ago, that is simply untrue today and until you can overcome that view you are in danger of sending yourself to the funny farm over something which is (a) simply wrong, and (b) simply unprovable even if it was right, which it isn’t. The truth is that you are desperate for the Guernsey finance industry to be proven to be systematically crooked but you are wasting your time looking for something that just isnt there…Its like looking for a needle in a haystack and you are struggling to even locate the haystack…you are looking in the wrong jurisdiction altogether.

Report abuse

118

Greg

Stephen, Your non stop defence of Arnald and his bashing of the finance sector does not (to me anyway) make sense when compared to your constant defence of people who wish to keep their bank accounts secret from their tax authorities to such a level that they wish to pay punitive taxes. Maybe you’re just trolling?

And I see you don’t comment on my question re people paying more tax than they need to! Let’s be realistic here….who overpays their tax? Who tears up their tax rebate? I don’t, and I bet you don’t either.

Report abuse

120

Arnald

smudger
wrong on all fronts
i am aware that vast improvements have been made.
doesn’t stop the abuse of sivs spvs and the rest.

i know there is african, indian and other poor jurisdictions riches here, or if not directly here then booked through us on a ‘sophisticated’ path to hide their whereabouts. Maybe it’s you that is unaware of why the transactions are being made.

If we weren’t secret you could easilt disprove me.

Greg
Tax compliance is paying the right amount if tax where it is earned and no more. Since Guernsey does not generate wealth then it is wrong that no tax can be paid on instruments booked here. Local depositors and businesses have to, so why shouldn’t the superrich that abuse their power to deprive their homelands.

You all really have no idea whatsoever what you are talking about.

It’s quite, quite sad.

I’m not asking to prove a negative, I’m asking for honesty and transparency. Maybe smudger could ignore those words in the dictionary too.

Integrity is worth more than a million of our ‘clients’. I know some of them, I’ve dealt with them until quite recently. I know what they do, but I have no idea where the money comes from, because they don’t have to tell me. Someone else can do that, if they so wish, under the legislation of the jurisdiction it’s coming from.

Your system would fall apart if it wasn’t like that.

Go back to school and stop insulting my intelligence with your nonsense. Stephen John used to argue against me before he obviously started reading into it. We’ve been around doing this for years now. He knows how you lot counter attack my educated opinion. He knows that not one shred of evidence in your defence has been submitted to scrutiny.

TL’s proper evaluation of my ‘partially compliant at best’ jibe is probably correct. It is subjective on my part, but still TL insists in taking it out of context with the content of the report. It quite clearly states it has concerns. Quite clearly, about the whole lot, whilst mentioning its leaders in London and the USA.

Boasting about wealth is playgroud behaviour. Fighting injustice is where we should be leading. With the wealth we manage we could be far more proactive and win far greater friends than the corrupt and destructive.

I hope none of you go to church.

Report abuse

122

Stephen John

Greg

The fact that you feel withholding assumes the person is evading tax is out of order.

Remember it was you who said you would investigate in order to make sense of a persons legally made choice. Seems odd when you claim twice today that they are hiding information from the appropriate tax authority. Not much investigation there just an assumption.

Your assumption that every depositor is fully aware of tax rules and advantages is speculative and dangerous. Not a very flattering opinion of Guernsey clients.

Phil

I certainly will not be bullied by your silly remarks and if i believe that Arnald, or anyone else; is generally making some good points (sans some of the more aggressive verbals)

The fact that you totally dismiss views you do not agree with as going down the road to Lunaticsvills says more about you, and your lack of tolerance, than those you criticise for having the temerity to think differently to you.

TL complains “I don’t think anyone has used “I say there is nothing wrong and we’re great” as an argument, we have simply disputed the supposed facts put forward by Arnald”

Yet, you guys constantly put your own interpretations on what we say.

Report abuse

124

Phil

Stephen

I do not dismiss views that differ from mine, I think you’ll find Arnald takes the biscuit on that particular issue.

Arnald is quite clearly obsessed with alleging that everybody in the finance industry is a liar, we’re responsible for all of the world’s ills etc etc. He has admitted the impact it has had on him personally, and made reference to his mental health (which judging by the content and tone of his posts is questionable at best).

Report abuse

126

Arnald

Alright Phil
Let’s look at ‘smudger’s’ last effort:

” am intrigued by your claim to have “passed the entries” etc in your post above…Just how long ago was that please as I can only conclude that you haven’t worked in the finance industry for many years, possibly even as far back as pre-AML days in 2000/2001 when, let’s be frank, things have changed massively since then….I feel that your “knowledge” is many, many years out of date which is a real pointer to you why so many posters on this thread aattack everything that you say…”

wrong. Come and see me and I’ll show you proof, transparently on my employment history, who I worked for and detail anything you may want to know about my personal life.

“You make all these allegations that the finance industry here is crooked but you don’t prove that it is…You merely demand that anyone who disagrees with you proves that it isn’t but the ball must be in your court to prove that it is, and you can’t because it isn’t! Have you ever studied the law of defamation”

wrong
I gave a couple of links a while back for starters, and many others over the years stating how GF and the Trust cos use tax abusive language to bring in trade. I have also mentioned our ‘sophistication’ countless times. Something I don’t need to ‘allege’ is immoral, it just plainly is.

“If you make a false and damaging accusation and cannot prove it to be true then you will be sued for defamation (libel or slander)”

wrong, otherwise I’d have been sued, if we had such a law. But you wouldn’t because you’d have to open up the tax abuse systems that are operated deliberately to deprive the fair payment of tax in the country it was earned. I should sue you for defamation to keep referencing ‘lunacy’. Pathetic argument again.

“It is not for the person accused by you to have to prove that that you are wrong because they cannot prove a negative…”

I am accusing you of promoting tax abuse and thus protecting clients of dubious stature with sources of funds that authorities in the countries where the funds are derived are unable to trace. Thus abusing that nation’s democratic laws. What’s negative about that? Even if I tried to launch an enquiry through legal challenges I couldn’t get passed the first hurdle due to legislation deliberately set down to prevent that very action.

You are wrong.
And those that agree with you are wrong.

Legal theft is still theft. De facto fraud is still fraud. Immorality cannot be bought and sold like Catholic Favours.

You know as well as I do (although I seriously doubt you know much at all about your industry at its core and its wider implications) that Tax Exchange Information Agreements are worthless PR exercises. Just by the very nature of the language used within them. I asked TL about Transfer Pricing, not a peep in response. Did smudger look at the damning Kaupthing wikileak? Nope not a peep. And then there’s our adoration of ruthless corporate raiders like the Tchenguizs’, arms nutters like Buckingham – oh I could go on but I’m tired of your irrational and insulting nonsense.

Is this the best you can do to defend yourselves, refer to my mental health because I know what I’m talking about.

I’m not asking you to prove a negative, I’m asking you to prove your worth to society. Let’s see what the PCCs and ICCs are really therefore. Let’s see what the subsidiary ccompanies we delight in servicing actually exist for. Come on, prove your positive.

“No,” you’ll say, “why should we?”

Report abuse

128

Smudger

@Arnald
1. You must have been working for the wrong banks/finance houses if that’s what you experienced. So did you report what you found to the FIU via your MLO….If not, why not?
2. A couple of links re a 2005 investigation that never went to court (so that’s “proof” is it, and why do you not think that the bank in question may have actually reported it to the FIU themselves to blow the whistle ?)…and an Icelandic bank with an Isle of Man operation which has lent some money to some offshore entities …was there any sort of criminal link to Guernsey as I appear to have missed it ? No -its your opinion that something is immoral…that doesn’t make it illegal and in fact doesn’t actually even make it immoral…Something is either illegal or it is not, that doesn;t change just because you Arnold think it ought to be illegal. Its utter garbage to claim that “sophisticated” Guernsey entities are in any way being used to attract undesirable business…If I buy a new saw from B&Q does that mean that I am going to use it to chop up human bodies?
4. No, you clearly know nothing about defamation….If you did then you’d realise that you don’t easily get sued for what is said on the internet although the publisher probably will be sued…here you go again – “deprive the fair payment of tax in the country in a country which it was earned…What about what’s legal tax avoidance…it’s just socialist claptrap to hark on about what’s “fair” – and who says that tax isn’t or wasn’t being paid in the relevant country of the owner of the money…That’s just your assumption. And how can you see me for referring to your lunacy ?…You haven’t suffered damage because nobody knows who Arnald is….and to be defamatory something has to be untrue and that’s highly debatable.
5. Your statement is a positive statement and to counter it I would have to prove that something isn’t what you claim it is…you just don’t get it do you ? You just stupidly say that of course if everything was fully open to the public then it could be proved…A futile argument because you know that the industry would not exist (which is what you clearly want) if everyone was deprived of the basic human right to privacy, and what are you then going to do when you were proved wrong ?…The business by then is long gone. Don’t be ridiculous. Look at my paedophile allegation example…how would someone prove that they weren’t a paedeophile after its alleged…Totally impossible to prove a negative. You are either too thick to understand this, or you realise that your “prove me wrong” tactic is your sole basis for your allegations…Isn’t that the same tack that RIchard Murphy uses ?
6. You then visit your pulpit to preach about morality…That’s merely your opinion about the finance industry but its not the law of this or any other land so get over it…
7. So if a TIEA is worthless why did the OECD and G20 demand them…clearly they didn’t consider them worthless ?
8. In answer to your question you clearly don’t know what you are talking about despite your claim that you do…And now you claim that actually you are not asking us to prove a negative but to prove our worth to morality…Since when was what the issue, but I can see why you have changed the question because your original argument has clearly run aground…Of course PCCs and ICCs have multiple technical benefits…You should research them and you might learn something…
I can well see why so many people consider you to be barking mad…as others have said, there really is no point wasting any more time with a “troll” who is clearly only posting on here to deliberately wind people up with such bizarre and unprovable allegations….I’ve no idea what medication you are on but I think you need a new prescription….I’ve got more enjoyable and worthwhile things to spend my time on like trimming my nosehairs.

Report abuse

130

Arnald

Greg
Arms dealers, drug runners and child traffickers are probably not ashamed of what they do because it makes them rich.

Try again

Report abuse

132

TL

Arnald, you really are conceited aren’t you?

In your mind you have a monopoly on deciding morality. Morality is not a given, it needs to be accepted by society before it becomes anything more than a personal opinion. Despite the picture you are trying to paint, legal tax planning is not generally considered to be immoral. Most people engage in it to some extent.

Your arrogant assumption that your view is the only right view is the reason why it is impossible to debate with you.

Report abuse

134

Arnald

There you go again.
Insular and unthinking.
We’re in deficit because of financial sytemic greed.
Globally unbalanced.
Talk to the poor in India or Africa and see if they say ‘tax planning’ is immoral.

It is not me that is arrogant, chaps. Truly astonishing.

Is this what they teach at the Colleges? Is this what the 11+ does to people?

Interesting to see the local ActionAid group were the highest achievers within their NGO.
Have you read their literature.
Oh, the irony.

You haven’t listened to a word I’ve said, ever, and you still won’t. Go back to your sad little lives and think of nothing. You deserve it.

Tragic wastes.

Report abuse

136

Phil

Arnald

Insular? Absolutely. I make no apology for putting my island first.

You carry on with trying to save the world, I’ll concentrate on my family, friends, colleagues and fellow islanders (those with some patriotism, unlike yourself).

Thankfully the chances of your views being taken on board are slim to the point of being non-existent. Whilst you may find the odd supporter on this site (odd in more than one sense of the word) anyone who matters, and who wants the best for the island, will discard your idealistic claptrap for what it is, the rants of a clearly obsessed individual who would happily sacrifice the economy of the island in order to satisfy their own warped vision of how the world should operate.

As for my life being sad, if sad means having a good job, a lovely girlfriend, close family, great friends, a full social life, helping youngsters in sport etc etc then you’re absolutely spot on (which makes a change).

Report abuse

138

Stephen John

Smudger

What are you talking about when you say “but merely a statement that you and Arnald should not be assuming that tax hasn’t been paid where it is meant to be paid”

That is what I have repeatedly said that your allies against me should not assume clients choosing the legaal withholding route are not doing it to evade paying tax. They might be, but one cannot assume that without investigation.

Phil – Your sly personal digs against anyone who has a moral conscience says much about you as a person and are unworthy of any comment.

I bet you haven’t got the guts to put your real name to your insults.

Thought not.

Report abuse

140

Phil

Stephen John

So you don’t think Phil is my real name? I can assure you it is, and there are other posters on here who are fully aware of that. Perhaps you ought to direct your accusations at Arnald, or Fast Robert maybe?

As for my alleged “personal digs”, if in your view they’re not worthy of comment, then the answer’s simple. Don’t.

Report abuse

142

Stephen John

Phil

If you were to ask a client for his or her real name it would be assumed that this was to identify the person. If their response was Phil you would respond by saying that was not enough to identify the person. Phil might not even identify the sex of the client or poster.

The same train of thought applies to me asking your real name so that you can be clearly identified.

Speaking of train of thought I wonder of Arnald is playing with you and enjoying winding you up and running rings around you with his obvious intellectual superiority.

Arnald’s breadth of knowledge of the world is like seeing something through a modern digital camera as against your narrow, protectionist, and parochial view as seen through your grannies box brownie.

But then I wouldn’t expect someone who views the concerns for morality in finance as being idealistic claptrap to understand this.

Report abuse

144

Smudger

@Arnald
It isn’t a requirement to disclose one’s entity on this blog and if it was then many contributors would not be willing or able to do so would they “Arnald” ? I can’t work out what you are asking people to now prove…I thought this was all about your allegations that Guernsey’s finance industry is all corrupt and is responsible for all the world’s problems but you seem to have wisely moved on from your demand that we try to prove a negative onto something different in which I’m not really interested, which suits me fine.

@Stephen John
I was starting to think that you were quite a sensible and intelligent person but it seems as though I was wrong…Of course merely giving the name of “Phil” wouldn’t satisfy a financial institution…Its a criminal offence not to properly identify a customer but last time I looked it wasn’t a criminal offence to give just a christian name or indeed a false name or nickname on an internet blog…You might feel high and mighty blogging under your own name but I think you’ve just embarrassed yourself by endorsing Arnald’s view of the world as being the way forward…Still, at least we know that Arnald has someone to second him as a candidate for the next States elections….I can’t wait.

Report abuse

146

bcb

Smudger
You say
I thought this was all about your allegations that Guernsey’s finance industry is all corrupt and is responsible for all the world’s problems.

Where does Arnald say this?
what garbage you spout.

Report abuse

148

Phil

Tom

Should you be in another thread? More like on another planet by the look of it, along with Arnald/Fast Robert/Lawrence and Stephen John.

The suggestion that I’m being wound up is a great one. My posts usually take me about 2 minutes to make, and the responses from Arnald I suspect take very much longer (although I concede that some of them appear to simply consist of random words put together in an ill thought out fashion, which can’t take that long to do).

At some point I may try to “prove” that our finance industry is “clean”, although quite how that could be done escapes me at present. If only I was able to spend my working day looking into these issues (rather than actually working) then I may be able to find some way of answering these impossible questions.

Report abuse

150

Arnald

All
I have not changed tack at all.
You have told me that you know more than me.
Maybe at a tiny little technical angle you do, I can’t argue with that. What I am constantly attacking is that by defending the ‘rules’ which we may or may not comply to, depending on who looks at it, is like reacting to a piece of modern art.

It is not reality. Nor even opinion. Creativity, and sophistication are subjective.
Humanity is not.

well look here

http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/2009/dec/13/drug-money-banks-saved-un-cfief-claims

funny I was just mentioning the juxtaposition just before, and I hadn’t even read that then, in reference to “why stop something that makes us live better re Columbian peasants”.

The UN, yes, the UN are saying that our type of business is supported by massive illegality.

You, and all the others, say it isn’t.

Back your claims up.

What’s this? The SFO are now going to sniff around the Icelandic banking fiasco.

Yet the Guernsey regulator, the Chief Minister, the politicians, GIBA; everyone, thinks there was nothing to be said. Worse, that those that lost their lives and their livelihoods were rubbished for making a stand, not only by the usual suspects, but by many forum posters. If it’s serious enough for the SFO, then that makes all those viscious posts, all those ‘misrepresenations’ by Trott, look calculated, ignorant and inhuman.

We followed the rules.

How do any of your arguments stand against this notoriety, that you wish to protect, that you wish to promote, that you think is beneficial, that you think that people that question it are somehow mentally ill, that you wish not to stand up and be counted, that you think you are superior to little ol’ me, that you think that technicality is more important than causality and that you have any integrity in doing so?

In all areas of the real world this system is failing. I am NOT saying that the expertise you have learned COULD NOT be beneficial, because the world needs capital flow.

I am saying that you are wrong in presuming that your opinion that I am wrong for knowing a bigger picture makes me a lunatic.

And that I am wishing destruction for Guernsey.

Your argument, quite simply, is one of arrogant preposturousness.

Until you start telling the truth and defending your position like an educated individual, nothing, but nothing, can defend you against the prising open of the filthy deceit that GuernseyFinance, GIBA and its ilk are spreading to the public of Guernsey.

I have never mentioned the eradication of finance, I have promoted transparency. You argue that that will send Guernsey back to the stoneage.

Perhaps Trott’s and Niven’s exploits at the taxpayer’s expense would be better used trying to persuade our cousins in the secrecy business to be less secret. Make better rules. Make the flow of capital more efficient.

Again, I await a suitably apt response from the geniuses you all are.

I’m just mad Arnald. The village idiot.

Power, corruption and lies, dear chaps. Try me. Challenge me. I’m up for it.

I have it all on my side. You have greed and fantasy.

Shiny baubles.

Report abuse

152

Stephen John

Smudger says “but last time I looked it wasn’t a criminal offence to give just a christian name or indeed a false name or nickname on an internet blog”

Once again another exaggerated and incorrect comment. No one has suggested it is illegal use a name such as Phil on a blog.

I had hoped that PPhil (and the same applies to you Smudger) would have the courage to put their real name to support ill manners they display in making personal insults.

Clearly Phil enjoys dishing out personal insults when his real identity is protected. Sad that he lacks the courage to identify himself to those he insults.

I didn’t think he had the courage to come out and positively identify himself . Now I know he hasn’t.

Phil

As I said yesterday Arnald is your intellectual superior. This being so I can well understand your frustration at not understanding his views when you feel “they simply consist of random words”

A lot of what he says reflects concerns of many about the world problems. But don’t worry too much if they appear to you as simply random words. We understand your intellectual limitations and your frustration that makes your responses consist of more and more of personal insults.

Report abuse

154

Tom Wright

So much for my attempt at being even handed! And no one noticed. When daggers are so drawn ’tis best to leave them at it.

Report abuse

156

Steven

Interesting article in the news today. Here’s the link. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8410489.stm

I suspected as much.

Report abuse

158

Phil

That’s it Arnald, keep up the good work! Insults, abuse, false claims, all in all a typical post.

The way you “prove” your arguments to yourself (and your little band of followers) is highly amusing. Did I see you saying that you’ll be standing for deputy at the next elections? It would be interesting to see how many people turn out to vote for you.

Even somebody of my limited ability would be able to count them I think.

Report abuse

160

Greg

@ Steven, have you actually read the NEF report that your BBC article is based on? It’s the biggest load of nonsense since Arnald’s last post! Bankers actually come out quite well.

Report abuse

162

Arnald

Where are my false claims?
Are we part of the global finance industry? Yes
Has a study suggested that the drugs trade supported the global finance industry dirung the credit crunch? Yes
Therefore has the drugs industry propped up the Guernsey finance industry?

Had Lansbanki had a suc/’child’ association in Guernsey?
Were not many of the major board members who made major loans to themselves at Kaupthing not based in Guernsey?

Where are the falsehoods.

You may not be interested in recent past cases, Zebedee, but the implications are quite clear. Because of the nature of our secrecy legislature, you just don’t know if there are illegal deals going on.

Smudger, you have missed a great deal, mon vieux. Of course the SFO investigation into London’s role in the collapse of Iceland affects us? 50% upsreaming, promoting deposit taking on the same day as liquidation? And GuernseyFinance’s role in attracting business from places like Dubai, Russia and China, even India and Africa, is a very real concern about sucking wealth from the countries that need it most.

Missed by a wide mark.

Are you therefore still disputing the majority world view?

Report abuse

164

Steven

@Greg

No, I didn’t read the NEF report, I only read the BBCs’ Martin Shanklemans’ take on it.

Though I must admit your view that it’s a load of nonsense if bankers actually come out quite well.

Report abuse

166

Steven

@Greg

I’m about a third of the way through the report entitled ‘A Bit Rich’ from the New Economics Foundation. I’m so glad that you promted me to do so.

This must be one of the most important reports for any government official to read. Never mind Tribal and other reports, this is a must read.

I am so glad that an organisation has taken this on. There is at last a glimmer of hope for what will otherwise be a devastating future that has the potential to destroy the very base that creates real wealth.

Report abuse

168

Greg

Steven, are you for real??? It’s absolute rubbish!

The NEF (on Radio 5 last night) also outrageously said that MRSA would not be so prevalent in UK hospitals if the cleaners were paid a higher salary. Which is basically the same as accusing them of not doing their job properly at present, resulting in the spread of MSRA. Nice!

Report abuse

170

Phil

Stephen John

I did not claim that “so many” are aware of my surname, I actually said “several”. Once again you and Arnald conveniently interpret words to mean whatever it is you want them to mean.

I also haven’t yet seen you accuse Arnald/Fast Robert/Lawrence of having a deficiency when it comes to “courage and basic decency”. Why is it that you are so keen for me to disclose my full identity, and yet are perfectly happy that others don’t?

Report abuse

172

Stephen John

Phil

The change you want

“As you claim several on this site are aware of your surname and your identity, why the reluctance to reveal your identity to those who you aim personal insults at”

Don’t deflect the question by referring to Arnald. He hasn’t made derogatory remarks of me.

Smudger

I see you have been reading your later]
latest comic. surely even you can do better that use the term troll. Is your vocabulary so limited?

Try answering the original question
“Your 10.40 post of this morning. What on earth are your trying to say? Try again and walk into the next trap; that has been laid for you!!!!!!!”

Or is it a random collection of words? Now walk into the next trap set for you.

Good to know you are up to speed with law of defamation. Tell me is it necessary to prove loss when defamed by the written word? Looking forward to your answer. Any case law to support your answer would be much appreciated.

Report abuse

174

Greg

Arnald, you’ll love that NEF report! It’s right up your street, and full of absolute rubbish.

Report abuse

176

Stephen John

Greg

You said “The NEF (on Radio 5 last night) also outrageously said that MRSA would not be so prevalent in UK hospitals if the cleaners were paid a higher salary. Which is basically the same as accusing them of not doing their job properly at present, resulting in the spread of MSRA”

One of the sad things about the outsourcing of ward cleaning is that it has become a profit centre for outsourcing companies.

It is a fact that wards are not so clean as they were when cleaned by nurses. There are well documented cases of this.

Paying cleaners more money as well as giving them more time to do the cleaning may well help reduce the incidence of MRSA. It might improve the quality of cleaning. On the other hand it might not.

Greg your comment that the NEF report is full of, note, not just rubbish, but absolute rubbish, is your opinion. Many will see both good and not good aspects of the report.

As you claim so much is rubbish would you care to give chapter and verse rather that a broad condemnation sans any evidence. Note you are not being asked to prove a negative, merely to support your allegations.

I would so much like to learn from you.

Report abuse

178

Arnald

By the way Zebedee, never use the same email address twice when you are “trolling” as two different people. It’s basic etiquette, really.

I think I preferred you in your earlier guise.

Report abuse

180

Greg

Stephen John, I appreciate your point that it is just my opinion however several of the points the report makes are incorrect, or the assumptions it makes are incorrect.

I’ve not really got time to go through line-by-line, but here are some of the areas i picked up.

1. Salary cap. Yes, this is all very nice in theory. However, unless you block migration (or have global agreement) then tax take is going to be reduced as your higher paid workers will leave. Look at football for example. The top players are attracted to the top wage payers. If the Premier League introduced a salary cap, other leagues would take the best players. This could be applied throughout different professions. If you have a lower tax take, you’re not going to be able to increase anyone elses wages, and your standard of living will drop.

2. The assumption that City bankers caused the collapse of the financial system. Yes, certain areas of the City were without doubt partially responsible for the current mess, but the report fails to look at the wider picture. Governments played their part in keeping interest rates artificially low, stoking various bubbles by the cheap credit on offer. The US consumers who took out NINJA loans which they couldn’t afford are also partially responsible, as are the parasite salesmen who sold these loans. The NEF report doesn’t bother to look at the wider picture.

3. Their City banker calculations are based purely on those earning £1mio or more in bonuses. There are huge numbers who earn less than this, yet these people are not included in their calculations (for obvious reasons, because if you lower that figure their argument loses it’s validity).

This thread is not about the NEF report, so i’m not going to further disect the report here. Yes, it does make some interesting points (especially if you have socialist leanings) but many of those points are created from shaky starting points.

And you point about the hospital cleaners includes giving them more time…this was not stated by NEF on the radio, just the salary point.

Report abuse

182

Steven

Greg. You said,

“@ Steven, have you actually read the NEF report that your BBC article is based on? It’s the biggest load of nonsense etc.”

And then said.

“Steven, are you for real??? It’s absolute rubbish!

And then went on to say.

“I’ve not really got time to go through line-by-line, but here are some of the areas i picked up.”

How very disingenuous of you.

Concerning your post 12:53.

Your point number 1. 1. Salary cap. Yes, this is all very nice in theory. However, unless you block migration (or have global agreement) then tax take is going to be reduced as your higher paid workers will leave. Look at football for example. The top players are attracted to the top wage payers. If the Premier League introduced a salary cap, other leagues would take the best players. This could be applied throughout different professions. If you have a lower tax take, you’re not going to be able to increase anyone elses wages, and your standard of living will drop.

The NEF shows otherwise as follows;

Myth 7: If we tax the rich, they will take their money and run
Orthodox economic theory suggests that people will choose to live and work where they stand to gain most in terms of personal finances.82 Given the opportunity, the theory says, they will move from a high tax jurisdiction to a low tax one to keep a higher share of their pay.
Intuitively, however, we understand that decisions on whether to emigrate are far more complex than that. They depend on a multitude of factors beyond just the financial, including cultural familiarity, environment, proximity to friends and family, and quality of public services.83
If it were the case that higher taxes caused wealth to flee we would expect to see an exodus of the wealthier citizens of Sweden, Denmark, Norway and France – the countries with the highest tax rates. A glance at the latest Forbes billionaires list84 reveals that of four Norwegians on the list all live in Norway, the two Danes live in Denmark, five of the nine Swedes live in Sweden, and eight of the ten French live in France.
And at an aggregate level there is little evidence that higher taxes reduce national income and wealth. A nation’s income is measured in terms of GDP. Adjusting for different population size, we might expect to see a reduced GDP per head in those countries, like Sweden, that have the highest tax rates. But GDP per head in Sweden is $52,057 per year, significantly higher than the levels in the UK ($43,089) and Germany ($44,471) where taxes are lower.85 What this suggests is that economic performance or prosperity is not adversely affected simply because of higher taxes.

Your second point. The assumption that City bankers caused the collapse of the financial system. Yes, certain areas of the City were without doubt partially responsible for the current mess, but the report fails to look at the wider picture. Governments played their part in keeping interest rates artificially low, stoking various bubbles by the cheap credit on offer. The US consumers who took out NINJA loans which they couldn’t afford are also partially responsible, as are the parasite salesmen who sold these loans. The NEF report doesn’t bother to look at the wider picture.

Firstly it is the Bank of England that controls interest rates. If the Government had any hand in it then you forget how much the government is influenced by the city financiers. Don’t blame the consumers, they are just trying to free themselves of rentiers by buying their own house, and the salesmen cannot sell something that doesn’t exist.

Within your third point you say.

Yes, it does make some interesting points (especially if you have socialist leanings) but many of those points are created from shaky starting points.

The whole thrust of the report has been promted by the very fabric of society being nearly ripped apart. Indeed society is very threadbare at the moment and is nowhere near as robust as it should be (a shaky starting point). If the fabric of society was to come apart commerce itself would suffer a catastrophic setback. Try and liken this to a cancer that, in destroying its host, is ultimately destroying itself. This report is trying to bring attention to this global problem before it is too late. What is happening in the world of commerce at the moment has just as significant consequences to the human race as the worst case scenario of global warming. Indeed is it not the race to profit at any cost that has created that problem aswell.

If we aren’t all socialists then some are deluded. I’d term myself a social capitalist, one who beleives that if one is prepared to worker harder than another then his (or her) reward should be greater, at the same time keeping in mind that the fabric of society is more important than profit.

If this subject isn’t discussed on this thread, where can we discuss it?

Report abuse

184

Arnald

One of you on here has broken all confidentially and have contacted my employer.
I will repeat, that is an issue between me and my employer.
As it happens, I have a day off today, so no need to contact them.
Who gave out the IP address I wonder. Who has the authority to track my anonymous postings, that after all, are just factually based opinions?

It truly is a disgrace.

I hope you are pleased.

I want this posted, Mr Editor, as it goes against all the rules, and it needs highlighting that just because people find me disagreeable, there is no recourse except for public response, in the same medium.

We do not live in a police state, and we do not live within the laws of the finance industry, nor do politicians, or any other body, have the right to intrude on my private dealings.

Now to answer apoint

David
If people choose to relocate, then there is no problem. If they choose to relocate and then accept a special status provided to them at society’s expense and paid for by the taxpayer of that country, and give nothing in return then that is a problem. The Scandinavian works well because of a social contract between personal individualism and loyalty to the state, and the state returns by easing the everyday burden of life with services.

Greed will always exist and so will loopholes. Opening up the system to expose the loopholes is just the first step in creating equality.

That is why these are myths. Relocation ok, tax abuse for those that can pay the charges to the corrupt system is not.

Someone on here has shown their true colours.

There are not two of me posting at the same time, you would recognise the language. There have been three of me over three years, yes, but never backing myself up.

You apologists of tax abuse and the hiding of dubiously sourced capital, unknowlingy or not, have shown the petty vindictiveness that comes hand in hand with your jobs in general. Mocking the weak and licking the dirt off the shoes of the rich.

Well done. Feel proud. You deserve it!

Report abuse

186

Ray

Arnald

I think you have wound up people so much that it was inevitable that someone would seek retribution.
Personally I stopped reading your rants ages ago because whatever the subject matter you manage to turn it into a very personal crusade against the Island’s largest employer.
If you did that in your OWN TIME then fair enough but I ,with many others I presume,look at the timing of your postings and think that this guy is either retired or living on State benefits or is thieving hours and hours of his employer’s time every week.
If I was in the Finance Industry and knew your identity and your employer’s identity I would be sorely tempted to snitch on you for that sole reason.
Here endeth the lesson

Report abuse

188

Arnald

Ray
What lesson? You have no idea how I spend my time, or whether it is ‘theft’ or ‘payback’ from extra hours?

The very fact that someone deems it necessary to censor me because of my factually based opinions and observable truths is the real issue.

As I only post on this type of thread, mainly, I can only assume that one of the finance ‘executives’ that delight themselves with their own ignorance has felt fit to use personal contacts in such a petty manner.

Secrecy to the last. They can’t even answer the questions i ask except with a “you’re nuts, who cares” attitude.

Ray, maybe you should read a bit more closely before making the same assumptions.

Lesson! You’re still the comedian, get on the telly.

Report abuse

190

Phil

Arnald

Despite not agreeing with virtually everything you say, I do not think that it is fair that your employer has been contacted.

Surely it has to be somebody at the GP, who else would have access to the information?

Report abuse

192

Greg

Arnald, until you have proof it is unwise to point the finger at “finance executives”. I don’t think anyone apart from David actually know’s who you are (or cares).

Your comment regarding secrecy is totally at odds with your post on 12th Dec at 9.25pm, where you question Phil’s integrity for not revealing his true identity. You can’t have it both ways.

Report abuse

194

Phil

Arnald

There is certainly an element of “hoist by your own petard” in all this. After all, isn’t it you who believes that everybody’s finances and business dealings should be entirely transparent?

Personally I value privacy too much to agree with your views, however (and bizarre as this may seem) perhaps someone who shares your mindset may be the one who contacted your employer?

Report abuse

196

Paul

Its simple really. Arnald could be Arnie the actor as far as any employers are concerned.

IP addresses can be traced from email addresses BTW.

It is a criminal offence & Arnold should see about taking it further as a breach of his privacy!

Report abuse

198

TL

Arnald is rightly annoyed at the breach of etiquette. No matter what you think of his views, and no matter how frustrating it is to try to engage him in debate, it is his right to say what he likes. If we don’t like it or disagree then we can ignore it or challenge it (I try to do both at varying times)

But to take the discussion away from that for a moment, there is this interesting article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8417205.stm

it shows how pointless it is trying to argue about the correctness of conclusions. You can really only discuss philosophy (which in my view involves a recognition that every counter argument is an equally valid philosophy) or argue about the correctness of facts.

I think that is where things get so heated on these blogs. Most of us are arguing about facts whereas Arnald is arguing about conclusions.

Just my assessment, of course ;-)

Report abuse

200

Arnald

Yes TL it is interesting. But it does not highlight how compliant those tax takes are from a fundamentally moral position. If those rich only pay, say 5%, after structural prestidigitation, and their cleaner pays 20% earning a tiny fraction of the their employer, then the argument falls over.

That’s what I’m on about. That is what our Peter Niven led, publically funded organisation, and C&E, and Trott and the rest of you promote.

Inequality. Injustice.

And all the social problems that are accepted are derived from these two words.

Report abuse

202

Greg

Steven, you may well be right regarding Gordon Brown being “wined and dined”. But I don’t think it’s just the finance sector that plays that game…look at the donation from Bernie Ecclestone for a starter! I think we can all safely assume that a lot of politicians are not perhaps as clean as they claim to be!!

As for the USD, things were fairly “shakey”. However, the size of the Chinese and Japanese US treasury holdings makes me think it will be the premier reserve currency for a little while longer, and therefore will receive support in bad times. However if the Chinese decide to sell………..

Report abuse

204

Arnald

Nothing to see here, please move along

from Island FM

“A local businessman has been charged with a money laundering offence following a Customs investigation into a £4,000,000 pound fraud…. Roger Taylor, a Company Director, was arrested on Tuesday and appeared before Magistrates on Wednesday. The case has been adjourned until the 21st of January”

“local” “company” “director”

Well done GFSC!

Report abuse

206

Bob

Arnald – assumed innocent until PROVEN guilty, surely?
Where do GFSC come into it?

Report abuse

208

TL

Arnald – what’s your point?

Are you saying that because someone has been charged (not yet convicted we must remember) that everyone must be money laundering?

Surely it shows that the system does work and that criminality is not the foundation of the industry as you suggest.

Or were you actually being genuine in your applause rather than sarcastic? It is difficult to tell.

Report abuse