"The merger between Lloyds and HBOS has been described in some quarters as a ‘shotgun wedding’. Lloyds Group Chief Executive Eric Daniels conceded that the merger proceeded swiftly on the basis of relatively little due diligence and that the Government was involved to the extent that it offered to waive the competition rules. We also note that the merger may have prevented the collapse of HBOS with the consequent loss of many thousands of jobs and also avoided the outright nationalisation of the company.
Nevertheless, from the evidence we received, if the merger has had injurious consequences for Lloyds TSB we consider that the responsibility for this lies primarily with the Lloyds Board."
So, Mr. Brown had nothing to do with it then?
The implication here is that the Lloyds board were offered a chance to monopolize the market and ended up handing the bank over the the government. Nevertheless, the greater good was enhanced because HBOS didn't go under. In effect, parliament neatly passes the blame onto a group of greedy banking half-wits. while at the same time, gently acknowledging the inventive way the government contained another banking failure.
However, lets wipe away the whitewash and clarify what really happened. The shareholders of Lloyds, in effect, had their property stolen by a government anxious to avoid a second Northern Rock fiasco. Their private property was used to save the reputations of this government. This merger exemplifies the moral degeneration of this country because parliament claims that a theft as outrageous as this can be passed off as "injurious consequences".
If we let this type of thing go unpunished, if we don't call the guilty to account, then we will slide into a cesspool of venal corruption. The lesson for unscrupulous politicians and businesspeople is simple; if you can get the presentation of a scandal right, then you can get away with anything.