Bankers said that the cost would be at least 50 per cent more with a phased transition over several years of the kind now planned.The banks’ paper backed the claim by Eddie George, Governor of the Bank of England, that the City was likely to benefit whether Britain stayed in or out of monetary union.. The management at Berisford, led by chief executive Alan Bowkett, were under pressure from the City yesterday after a profits warning sent shares in the Magnet kitchens to catering equipment group to a three-year low. The chain of events the bankers fear is a delay in a UK decision to beyond early 1998.
The risk is that any delay in signing at that stage could be followed by a belated British decision to catch up and complete the transition to a single currency by 2002.The paper said that if the changeover was to be completed by the target date of 2002, detailed specifications for the investments required would have to be drawn up in 1997 and implementation would have to start in 1998.But bankers are concerned that with an election next year and wrangling continuing in both main political parties, the chances of a clear-cut decision in 1997 or early 1998 do not appear good.The last estimate for the cost of monetary union to British banks, drawn up in 1994, was pounds 1bn, but that assumed a single “Big Bang” transition. A joint paper by the British Bankers’ Association, the Association for Payment Clearing Services and the London Investment Banking Association said this could be “highly disruptive for all sectors of the economy and expose UK financial institutions to real competitive disadvantage”. British banks warned yesterday that the worst possible outcome of the discussions over monetary union would be Britain delaying a decision because of political disputes but eventually signing up for full participation on the same timetable as everybody else.

A Lloyd’s spokesman said the claim was “rubbish,” because no conditional acceptances had been counted.A separate organisation called Friends of United Names is being set up to accept donations from Lloyd’s names who joined the rescue plan but want to encourage the rebel names to fight on.Sir William, a property consultant, also said a new foundation was being established to campaign against fraud of all types, anywhere in the world, and he hoped it would win endowments worth “hundreds of millions”.. It will be real financial power going after Lloyd’s.”He would not be drawn on whether the organisation planned to take the initiative and sue Lloyd’s for fraud.The alternative is to wait for Lloyd’s to sue names who have refused to sign up for the rescue plan, for recovery of their debts.Fraud would then be used as a defence against Lloyd’s claims for the unpaid money, which could run into hundreds of millions of pounds.Catherine Mackenzie-Smith, joint chairwoman of the new organisation , said it did not matter which side started the case because “it comes to the same thing in the end”.Sir William claimed that 5,000 of the Lloyd’s names who had accepted the rescue offer had put conditions into their acceptance letters and he hoped this category of names would join the organisation. More than 1,800 members refused to sign.Sir William Jaffray, one of the founders of the new grouping, made clear that plans were being prepared to accuse Lloyd’s in court of fraud over the pounds 8bn of losses the market ran up.He said: “We have the resources across the board to fight to the bitter end. Leaders of Lloyd’s rebel groups in the US and Canada are expected to attend.
The formation of the new group is the first public confirmation that the Lloyd’s refuseniks, as some describe themselves, are likely to continue the war despite losing the biggest battle.Earlier this month, Lloyd’s reached acceptance levels of more than 94 per cent of its 34,000 names for the reconstruction and renewal plan.

The United Names Organisation is to hold its inaugural meeting in London on Thursday, and founder members claimed it was likely to attract a “core membership” of 2,500. Rebel Lloyd’s names who refused to sign up to the market’s pounds 3.2bn rescue plan said yesterday they were to set up anorganisation which was expected to continue the fight in the courts. The takeover of SB would put it ahead of Cowie and Stagecoach.SB Holdings was bought by its employees for pounds 21m in 1993 when Strathclyde Buses was privatised, and the 3,500 workers were expected to enjoy a share- out of around pounds 35,000 each for the 6,000 shares they would receive if the deal was allowed to go ahead.There was speculation at the time of the bid in May that a reference to the MMC was likely because the company already owned Grampian, Midland Bluebird and Lowland in Scotland.The local Strathclyde Passenger Transport Authority had expressed concerns over the takeover, particularly the potential it gave for FirstBus to have “excessive dominance” in the Greater Glasgow area.However, Mr Taylor stressed yesterday that he was only following the rules and “the decision to make a reference does not in any way prejudge the question of whether or not the merger would be against the public interest”.The MMC must report by 23 December.Stagecoach has already fallen foul of the regulatory authorities over SB, having been forced to sell a 21.7 per cent holding in the company at the end of 1994.FirstBus is still in an acquisitive mood and last month announced that it intended to bid for nearly all the remaining 12 rail franchises.The group already jointly controls Great Western together with the management buyout team and is particularly interested in the ScotRail franchise but this is also likely to cause problems with the Office of Fair Trading.. John Taylor, the consumer affairs minister, said yesterday: “The acquisition raises competition concerns in the operation of the bus market in central Scotland which merit investigation by the MMC.”
FirstBus, formed by the merger of Badgerline and GRT in 1995, launched its bid for SB Holdings in May, offering pounds 110m. This could cover the carriage of dangerous goods, inspection of driving instructors and outdoor activity centres.. FirstBus’s attempt to become Britain’s biggest bus company was put on hold yesterday after its bid for SB Holdings, the parent company of Strathclyde Buses, was referred to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission.

A spokesman said this suggested that the problem had not been significantly eased.The task force’s second annual report included a collection of recommendations covering everything from regulations on factory machinery to controls over ear piercing.Another idea under consideration is to replace regulations with private insurance assessed by risk. They’re trying to get round all the regulations which didn’t matter and in the process are creating more paperwork, not less.”The Forum of Private Business yesterday released figures showing the burden of red tape and tax rules had become as important a concern as late payment of debt. Ronald Stallard, who employs eight staff at a Sussex plant hire company, said: “If anything it has made things worse. Roger Freeman, the cabinet minister responsible for deregulation, said a three- year “holiday” from official form-filling could save industry pounds 17.5m by 2000.However many small businesses were unimpressed by the rate of progress. These are the kinds of proposals you get from dictatorships,” he said.Mr Heseltine hit back at critics who claimed the deregulation initiative was little more than a propaganda exercise.