Q - What is MAG and who is behind it?
A - It's a group supported by account holders, current and former bank employees, business people – small, medium and large – and other likeminded people who are concerned by the manner in which the UK Government is allowing the proposed merger of HBOS and Lloyds TSB to go through without referral to the Competitions Commission or to due process of law.  Membership of MAG is open to all suitably affected people.  The full list of initial supporters will be available next week, and will be regularly updated as we grow.

Q - What is MAG's aim?
A - To challenge within a judicial review before the Competition Appeal Tribunal [CAT] the decision by the UK Government – and in particular Secretary of State Lord Mandelson – to ignore the Office of Fair Trading’s concerns over competition rules and allow the merger to go ahead against established practice and legislation.  It our view, the Government acted unlawfully.

Q - Who are the key players?
A - This is a grassroots campaign, and there are no "key players" as such, but roles which will be filled according to expertise.  Malcolm Fraser has initially been appointed spokesman.  It needs to be stressed that the CAT Appeal and the accompanying public appeal is likely to be supported by many people who are rightly concerned about what has happened and what will happen in the future.  Remember, that this proposed merger affects all sorts of people up and down the country.

Q - Who is funding your appeal and campaign?
A - MAG is a broad-based group.  We are aiming to gain financial support from all sorts of sources.  As an association of like-minded people we are legally able to raise the cash required to fund the appeal.  Fundraising will form part of our campaign.  In addition, our legal team is taking a constructive approach to our costs given that they believe strongly in the public interest involved.

Q - Is your aim really to stop the merger talking place?
A - There are many people – some of them within MAG – who are not in favour of the merger.  But this is not the point of MAG.  The aim here is to challenge the Government’s stance to sweep aside rules and laws that would normally apply.  If this is allowed to go ahead, it would set a dangerous precedent for the future.  Our legal challenge is narrowly focused on issues of law, not on the merger's merits.  Specifically, we have not called into question the actions of the banks involved. 

Q - What is CAT?
A - It is a judicial body, made up of 20 high court judges and senior lawyers, three of whom sit on a panel.  They have the power to overturn a Government decision if they judge it to be in the public interest.  In this case MAG is asking the panel to revoke Lord Mandelson’s decision to set aside competition laws to allow the merger/takeover to proceed and order the Government to refer the deal to the Competitions Commission.

Q - Why do you believe the Government is adopting this stance, and not reviewing its decision following the wider rescue package?
A - A number of people have stated that they do not believe there is a level playing field for alternatives beyond that which the Government originally proposed.  Our contention is that circumstances changed and that in any event a pre-judged (or "Fettered") outcome was unlawful.  The UK Government will have to justify its stance; our interest in the proper application of Competition Law and in the proposed use of public money to facilitate what we believe may be against the public interest.

Q - How do you rate your chances of success in this application to CAT?
A - MAG is fortunate to have engaged the services of top QC Ian S. Forrester, who is based in Brussels and is a specialist in European and competition law.  Ian is supported by an excellent team in Europe, and by Walter Semple and Andrew Bowden QC, both of whom practise in Scotland.  We would not have submitted our appeal if we did not believe in our case.  We are engaging seriously, comprehensively and responsibly with an established legal process.

Q - When and where will MAG’s application he heard?
A - MAG’s legal papers were lodged with CAT in London along with an application in line with CAT'S powers to request that the panel sits in Scotland on the basis that the applicant and the two banking companies are Scottish based.  Normally CAT would allow three weeks for other submissions following the lodging of the application, but it has the power to shorten that period and, given the circumstances of this case – ie that the merger is on-going and the HBOS shareholders vote on the deal on December 12 – it is possible that the hearing could start within days rather than weeks.

Q - Why has this action not been taken by others?
A - This is a daunting process, and is not to be taken lightly.  MAG has allowed a group of individuals to take action that may not otherwise have been possible.  MAG cannot speak for other organisations as to why they have not taken similar action.

Q - Does the campaign take a political stance?
A - No. We are simply a broad-based association of concerned individuals. Our only concerns are what are in the best interests of UK employment, competition and law.

Q - If CAT upholds the Government’s decision, where does MAG go from there?
A - We have prepared our appeal on the basis of facts which we believe will prove our case.  We have faith in the legal process and will not pre-judge a negative outcome.