Jill Sherman, Rosemary Bennett and David Rose
Over 900 restaurants nationwide. Find your nearest now
Hospitals and universities yesterday became the latest victims of the collapsed Icelandic banks as the huge scale of taxpayers’ investments began to emerge.
At least ten universities have together invested tens of millions of pounds, and the Christie Hospital, the specialist cancer hospital in Manchester, was one of two foundation trusts that have admitted making deposits of £2 million, The Times has learnt.
The other, the Central and North West London, is one of the largest mental-health trusts in the country, serving eight London boroughs.
Chelsea Building Society also disclosed a £55 million exposure to Kaupthing and Landesbanki, the two Icelandic banks that failed this week.
Charity organisations revealed that more than £125 million had been deposited in the banks before an emergency meeting with Paul Myners, the City Minister, where they demanded protection for their assets.
Cats Protection emerged yesterday as the latest and biggest charity victim of the Icelandic banking crisis so far, with £11.2 million of its donations now at risk.
Earlier, senior officials from the Treasury, the Bank of England and the Financial Services Authority flew to Reykjavik for urgent talks with Icelandic authorities to try to sort out the crisis involving £1.2 billion of taxpayers’ money and 300,000 personal investors. But after the meeting with charities at the Treasury in London, ministers still refused to guarantee protection for public or voluntary bodies or pledge financial support. Charities and town hall organisations were told to gauge the extent of the crisis and come back next week with detailed figures of the amounts invested and the impact this would cause.
Whitehall officials refused to promise interim help and even started to talk down the limited package that had been offered to town halls on Wednesday night after it became clear that 108 councils had invested nearly £1 billion in Icelandic banks, a tenth of their total reserves.
University vice-chancellors are due to discuss the effects of the financial crisis at a scheduled board meeting today but sources said that at least ten universities are now facing losses of tens of millions of pounds from investments in failed Icelandic banks. Officials of the Higher Education Funding Council for England will work over the next two months to establish the effect of the financial crisis on university finances, looking particularly at the health of large investment funds controlled by the biggest institutions such as Oxford and Cambridge.
Monitor, the regulator overseeing the 107 NHS foundations trusts in England, admitted that at least two – the Christie and the Central and North West London – face potential losses totalling £2 million which was invested in Icelandic banks.
A spokesman for Monitor, which this week sent out a letter to foundation hospitals asking them to report on their investments, said patients’ services would be unaffected. Foundation trusts enjoy a degree of independence from central government control, with the freedom to manage their own budgets and investments.
Norman Lamb, the Liberal Democrat health sppokesman, said: “The first priority has to be that the Government supports hospitals to recover as much of their money as possible. We also need to know how much money NHS foundation trusts have exposed as deposits in commercial banks.”
Mike Penning, the Conservative Shadow Health Minister, said: “The Government needs to get a grip on this issue quickly, and work out how much NHS funding is exposed to the financial problems in Iceland.”
Earlier, Mr Myners asked the National Council of Voluntary Organisations (NCVO) to compile a definitive list of which charities were affected and by how much, and also a second list of charities whose losses could place vulnerable groups at risk if services have to be withdrawn.
After the meeting at the Treasury, John Low, chief executive of the Charities Aid Foundation, said: “They gave reassurance they would do their best to help, but there was not any guarantee, as we would have liked. There was no suggestion that there would ever be any guarantee, just that they would make best endeavours to support charities. But that was it.”
The NCVO estimates charities’ total exposure is at least £125 million. However, charities are also facing the prospect of a sharp fall in donations as households and businesses seek to cut their costs. 9 lives good; 90 days disaster
Case study
Plans for a new adoption centre for abandoned and unwanted cats in Leeds may seem a long way from the Icelandic banking crisis.
But the decision by the Cat Protection charity to place £11.2 million of its donations on deposit with Kaupthing Singer and Friedlander three years ago means the new adoption centre, and another in Belfast, are in jeopardy.
The demise of Lehman Brothers last month prompted the charity to move the cash and on September 17, it gave the bank the required 90-day notice that it would be withdrawing the funds. It heard on Wednesday that KSF had been put into administration. The Government has so far said it that will guarantee only those deposits held by individual investors.
The charity, which rehomes 55,000 cats a year through a network of 250 branches, has an annual income of about £35 million from individual donors and legacies, so day-to-day operations will not be affected.
Last night a spokesman defended the decision to have such large sums on deposit in a single institution. The £11.2 million on deposit represents only 16 per cent of the charity’s reserves. It also has money with Barclays, NatWest and the Coop.
Peter Hepburn, the chief executive, was upbeat, saying: “This news makes no threat to the charity’s ability to pay bills, salaries, or most importantly, provide for the cats in its care.”
The moment your toes touch the sand and your gaze meets water, you know you’re in the Bahamas.
Risk, resilience and embracing new technology
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
05/2005
£13,500
08/2008
£109,950
2005 / 55
£59,500
Great car insurance deals online
Circa £60,000
The Army Benevolent Fund
London
£28k+ Basic + Commission
Drummond Selection
London
12-15 days a year, c £12K
Springboard
London
£Competitive
American Airlines
Heathrow, London
Great Investment, River Views
One and Two Bed Apartments
Wandsworth Town
Times Online Property Search will help you Find It
like nothing on Earth!
.
Must end 28 Feb 2009!
Save up to 25%
Amazing Far East Offers
Visit Malaysia from £755pp
Great travel insurance deals online
.
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths | Subscriptions
News International associated websites: Globrix Property Search | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
David Winkworth is correct. Local Government Finances need to be looked at. Why do they have so much cash?
David Morrison, Airdrie, UK
Taxpayer's money should be spent on services for the taxpayer. Sounds obvious doesn't it? And not invested in a foreign bank (or home) for the long term gains of the council. If there is excess cash from the taxpayer but not enough to invest in services, then save it in a Govt backed account.
Howard, Manchester,
They should take the £70m the cats charity is worth off them and give it to the worthwhile causes that have lost money through the foolishness of their management.
I find it obscene that a cats charity should have £70m in the bank with so much human suffering in the world.
Paul, Southampton, UK
I had no idea that a charity for cats had such a vast sum of money. We must be a nation of imme.nse cat lovers. That is a huge sum of money
Dona, Edinburgh, Scotland
The cats had no other choice than to put their money in the bank simply because they have no pockets.
Ed, London,
Lay off the Icelandic government. Have you heard Brown or Darling guaranteeing overseas investments in British banks? No, of course you haven't. And sacking the council bosses would acheive nothing, Edward. They only did what their supposedly expert advisers told them to do.
Roger Tilbury, Worthing,
During the last few weeks I noticed the Icelandic banks (who I had never heard of) were offering incredibly good rates of interest.Yet HSBC which has to be one of the safest in the world was offering much smaller returns.Now we know why.Surely these 'professionals' should have twigged.
Jan, London, England
All we need now is to hear that the National Lottery has invested in Icelandic banks!
Christine A., Aberdare,
The biggest mistake the Icelandic Prime Minister has made is in not guaranteeing the savings of British savers immediately. This action has destroyed the long term viabiltiy of Iceland's financial industry and foreign banks as a whole, forever in terms of UK savers. The guarantees were blatant lies.
A Jones , UK, UK
Please explain the rationale behind local authorities & charities etc. depositing vast sums of money with, minor banking institutions in one of the smaller economies in the world??
And what about reducing risk by opting for larger banks and placing smaller amounts with each bank??
MBT Northants
M Touhey, Towcester, UK
UK authorities and charities shouldnt be putting money in foreign funds. My response - live by the sword, die by the sword. People CHOSE to make bad investments. If it goes up you gain, if it goes down you lose. I didnt chose so its not my loss. UK govt shouldnt give any money for those bad choices.
Phil, Belfast,
I'm sorry for the charities, and for the universities and health trusts, though I fear they will have to be left to tough it out.
But where is the logic in bailing out local authorities? All this would do is to 'relieve the pressure' on tax payers by using tax payers money.
jeannie, Perugia,
Why do councils have so much money on deposit? They are meant to collect the council tax and then spend it. They need a large ballance on their curret account to cover various expenses - but not money on deposit. If they can not spend the money, better to reduce the tax.
David Winkworth, Farnborough, Hampshire
I cant understand why these organisations are investing in a foreign bank. . if they have taken that type of risk they should bear the loss.its no point saying that the local residents should cough up in a hike in their council taxes. the people in charge & auditorsof these finances should be sacked
johnpt, london, uk
Stupid, poorly planned yield chasing. If banks are offering high rates they are taking greater risk with your cash. I assume that, should taxpayers ever see their money again, they will have their bills reduced or rebated. Either way all council bosses involved should be sacked.
Edward, London,