Bank of England refuses comment on huge discrepancy in custodial gold reports

Empfehlen / Bookmarken

The Bank of England refuses to explain what appears to be a huge discrepancy in its accounting of the gold it holds in custody, a difference of as much as 1,200 tonnes between the total reported in the bank’s annual report in February and the total reported in a “virtual tour” of the bank posted this month at the bank’s Internet site.

By Chris Powell

Note by Lars Schall:

Yesterday, I wrote the following to the Bank of England:

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,
my name is Lars Schall, I am a freelance journalist for finance from Germany.

Related to this news item posted at the web site of the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee, GATA:

http://www.gata.org/node/12854,

I would like to ask if it’s true, as Mr. Alasdair Macleod said, that there has been a big reduction in the bank’s gold holdings from the bank’s annual report in February to the “more than 400,000 bars” now claimed in the “virtual tour” on the bank’s Internet site? Moreover, I would like to ask specifically if you could tell me the gold holdings reported in the annual report and the gold holdings currently or on a recent date?

Kind regards,
Lars Schall.

I received today an answer from the press office of the Bank of England. However, I am not allowed to quote from that e-mail, since it said at the beginning: NOT FOR QUOTATION OR ATTRIBUTION. Yet, take a look at this post by GATA’s Chris Powell; what I got confidentially, he got it officially…

Dear Friend of GATA and Gold:

The Bank of England refuses to explain what appears to be a huge discrepancy in its accounting of the gold it holds in custody, a difference of as much as 1,200 tonnes between the total reported in the bank’s annual report in February and the total reported in a “virtual tour” of the bank posted this month at the bank’s Internet site:

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/Pages/info/virtualtourapp.aspx

The discrepancy was noted by GoldMoney research director Alasdair Macleod last week during an interview with Max Keiser on the “Keiser Report” program on the Russia Today television network:

http://www.gata.org/node/12854

Responding to Macleod’s assertions, your secretary/treasurer wrote to the bank’s public information office Sunday seeking clarification about the bank’s custodial gold.

A reply was quickly sent from the bank but it was unclear. So your secretary/treasurer wrote back asking for plain answers to these questions:

1) Will the bank confirm any difference in the amount of gold reported held in custody in February and the amount in custody reported by the new Internet site application?

2) Did Alasdair Macleod misconstrue anything about the Bank of England’s custodial gold in his remarks on the “Keiser Report” program on Russia Today?

3) Is the bank declining to acknowledge changes in the amount of gold in its custody? If so, could you explain why?

4) Does the bank prefer to be reported to be declining to acknowledge substantial changes in the amount of gold in its custody?

A reply received today from the head of the bank’s public and internal communications division, Chris Shadforth, provided affirmative answers to Questions 3 and 4:

“The number of bars mentioned in the app cannot be used to infer a change in the amount of custodial gold held by the Bank of England as the figure is deliberately non-specific,” Shadforth wrote. “The bank will not be offering any further comment on this matter.”

That is, the information provided to the public by the bank about its custody of gold is for entertainment purposes only and the facts of surreptitious intervention by central banks in the gold and currency markets are not to be discussed, in accordance with the findings of the secret March 1999 report of the International Monetary Fund, revealed by GATA last December, which related that central banks conceal their gold swaps and leases to facilitate secret market intervention:

http://www.gata.org/node/12016

So Macleod will stand uncontradicted and participants in the financial markets — at least the few who pay attention — may fairly assume that the smashing of the gold price in April well may have been related to an huge outflow of metal from the Bank of England’s vault.

And once again the great asset of Western central banking in surreptitious market manipulation is shown to be the refusal of mainstream financial news organizations to put specific and critical questions to central banks and to report their refusals to answer.

CHRIS POWELL, Secretary/Treasurer
Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee Inc.

Both comments and pings are currently closed.

5 Responses to “Bank of England refuses comment on huge discrepancy in custodial gold reports”

  1. Mr Shadforth’s reply can of course be read in more than one way, depending on one’s preconceptions and biases.

    However, taken at face value, he clearly says that the figure mentioned in the BoE app is “deliberately non-specific” since “The number of bars mentioned in the app cannot be used to infer a change in the amount of custodial gold held by the Bank of England”.

    So, yes, the app seems to have been intended as ‘entertainment’, not as a formal accounting report.

    Therefore one could conclude that Macleod’s conclusions based on it should perhaps also be regarded as simply more ‘entertainment’, albeit sensationalized for Keiser’s circus audience.

  2. JCC sagt:

    No comment or truth?

    “Well Golly Sarge, surprise, surprise.”
    — Gomer Pyle

  3. Truth sagt:

    Gee, i didnt know that Ben Bernanke’s pseudo was SlowLorisLarry,
    the Central Banker excuse maker.
    Fascinating at how many people like Larry get defensive when someone
    proves to them how they have been swindled.

  4. It is only 150,000 ozs. That does not seem to be a lot.

  5. Scarlett sagt:

    I have a question. William Kaye was on King World News July 10/2013 in an interview. Near the end he mentions Heraeus Refinery that refined the gold from the west to supply the east.

    As you know Roosevelt confiscated gold in 1933 and that gold was melted into bars. Not refined 24k bars but 22k bars with base metals. That would be tainted gold, would it not.

    Thus, if Heraeus refined gold from the west, would the gold refinery be able to tell where that gold was coming from? If it was 22k gold bars would that not signify gold bars from the US gold reserve? We would know then if the US government was supplying gold to suppress the market.

    You have contacts to verify this Lars?

Subscribe to RSS Feed Lars Schall auf Twitter folgen