[P2P-F] Fwd: Icelandic Icesave referendum

[Dante-Gabryell Monson]

http://www.irishleftreview.org/2011/03/22/4373/

Questions for the ECB ahead of the Icelandic Icesave Referendum

Published:March 22nd, 2011

Section:Articles <http://www.irishleftreview.org/category/articles/>,
Politics <http://www.irishleftreview.org/category/politics/>

Discussion:No comments so far
*↓*<http://www.irishleftreview.org/2011/03/22/4373/#comments>

Possibly Related:Banking
Crisis<http://www.irishleftreview.org/tag/banking-crisis/>
, Britain <http://www.irishleftreview.org/tag/britain/>,
EU<http://www.irishleftreview.org/tag/eu/>
, Iceland <http://www.irishleftreview.org/tag/iceland/>,
Netherlands<http://www.irishleftreview.org/tag/netherlands/>

*A copy of the following letter has been sent by a small Icelandic group
campaigning in advance of theforthcoming
referendum<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-16/iceland-support-for-icesave-agreement-decreases-poll-shows.html>
on
the terms of  the Icesave deal with Britain and the Netherlands to several
officials within the EU and EFTA as well as to the ministeries of Britain,
Holland and Iceland to whom this case belongs. The letter has also been sent
to several European newsmedia.*

Reykjavik 18.03.2011

Mr Herman Van Rompuy

President of the European Council

European Council
Rue de la Loi 175
B-1048 Brussels

Belgium

Dear Mr Van Rompuy

The Icelandic banks (90%) collapsed in autumn 2008 and with the banks
Landbanki’s subsidiaries in London and Amsterdam (the Icesave deposits).
According to the principal rule of the European Economic Area Treaty, the
concept of market equality is the basis of co-operation within the European
Community as stated in the Agreement on the EEA Part I: Objectives and
principles, article 2, item e:

*“the setting up of a system ensuring that competition is not distorted and
that the rules thereon are equally respected…”. (Highlighted by
signatories) **It is clearly stated that the principal rule of the EEU
co-operation is to prevent distortion of competition”.*

In this light, British and Dutch authorities were obliged to ensure that
Landsbanki branches in London and Amsterdam had satisfactory securities from
The Depositors’ and Investors’ Guarantee Funds within their own borders. If
that were not the case, it would have been marketing distortion.

Britain and Netherlands unilaterally decided to make the Icesave deposits a
political issue instead of a legal one. On that basis, they have demanded
that Icelandic taxpayers pay the Icesave deposits which under EU regulations
should have been covered by British and Dutch Depositors‘ and Investors‘
Guarantee Funds, as is clearly stated in European Economic Area treaty.

The first reaction of the Icelandic government was that Iceland was being
bullied and the Icesave dispute should be resolved in courts. Britain and
Netherlands refused but prior to that the British government had taken the
unprecedented action to use anti-terrorism legislation against Iceland and
Landsbanki. As a consequence, Kaupthing bank operations (Singer &
Friedlander) in Britain were closed down and with it fell Iceland‘s biggest
bank.

Due to these harsh actions taken by British and Dutch governments all flow
of capital to and from Iceland was stopped. Iceland state finances were
taken hostage by a foreign power. As a consequence, Iceland was forced to
negotiate the Icesave deposits if the country was to get assistance from the
International Monetary Fund. The IMF demanded that Iceland negotiated the
Icesave deposits due to pressure from Britain, Holland and European Union
countries.

The current Icesave agreement can cost Iceland up to half of its state
budget. If the Emergency law of October 2008 will not stand up in court of
laws, the Icesave deposits will amount to double state budget. The people of
Iceland have found it hard to accept being forced to pay for actions made by
reckless and irresponsible bankers: burdens which according to
EEA-regulations actually belong to British and Dutch Depositors’ and
Investors’ Guarantee Funds as applied to fair and equal competition within
the European Economic Area.

The Icelandic nation will vote in a referendum on the latest
Icesave-agreement on the 9th of April 2011. We refused to accept the last
one in a referendum. We therefore feel compelled to get answers to the
*following
questions* before the referendum.

1. What is the moral value of an agreement between three parties (latest
Icesave-agreement) where two parties (Britain and Holland) force the third
party (Iceland) to the negotiation table when the matter should be on the
table of The Depositors’ and Investors’ Guarantee Funds in Britain and
Holland?

2. Why has Iceland not been able to defend itself in courts of law against
British and Dutch claims?

3. In the light that Landsbanki had to apply to British law, why was the
bank allowed to open saving accounts before it had made the necessary
arrangements with the Depositors’ and Investors’ Guarantee Funds?

a. Did it not distort competition as Landsbanki was not obliged to make
arrangements with the Guarantee Funds in Britain and Holland?

b. Was the interest of British and Dutch consumers not looked after, as
Landsbanki did not have to pay to the Guarantee Funds like its competitors?

c. Is the European Union going to let Britain and Holland violate the
principals of the EEA-treaty on equality of competition?

4. Is it in accordance with EU policy to let the taxpayers bear the burden
when private banks go bankrupt?

5. Are Depositors’ and Investors’ Guarantee Funds of any country within the
European Union strong enough to guarantee deposits in the case of (90%)
banking collapse?

6. What will be the reaction of the European Union if the people of Iceland
reject the latest Icesave agreement on the 9th of April 2011?

Sincerely and with requests for good answers

*Signed:*

Ásta Hafberg, student business management
Baldvin Björgvinsson, certified electrician, teacher
Björn Þorri Viktorsson, supreme court attorney
Elinborg K. Kristjánsdóttir, journalist, student
Elías Pétursson, CEO
Guðbjörn Jónsson, retired consultant
Guðmundur Ásgeirsson, software developer
Gunnar Skúli Ármannsson, cand med
Haraldur Baldursson, technologist
Helga Garðasdóttir, student
Helga Þórðardóttir, teacher
Inga Björk Harðardóttir, teacher, artist
Karólína Einarsdóttir, biologist and teacher
Kristbjörg Þórisdóttir, cand. psych.
Kristján Jóhann Matthíasson, retired fisherman
Pétur Björgvin Þorsteinsson,deacon, Evang.Lutheran Church
Rakel Sigurgeirsdóttir, teacher
Sigurjón Þórðarson, biologist
Sigurlaug Ragnarsdóttir, bachelor of fine arts
Steinar Immanúel Sörensson, ideologist
Þorsteinn Valur Baldvinsson Hjelm, surveillance officer

*Answers and/or questions should be sent to*

Gunnar Skúli Ármannsson Cand. Med.

Seiðakvísl 7

110 Reykjavík

Iceland
e-mail: gunnarsa AT landspitali.is <gunnarsa at landspitali.is>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20110327/e9d5c362/attachment.htm