After all, it was not their fault that the bank's bosses pursued such a high-risk agenda in search of bigger profits.

And when the walls came tumbling down, the Government rightly stepped in and used the financial services compensation scheme to transfer those deposits to the safe haven offered by Abbey.

What is less agreeable however is how the burden of bailing out that reckless lender is perversely being borne by the most prudent of financial institutions.

Over the last few days, I have spoken with leading executives at the region's building societies about this issue.

Their message is the same: the cost they must pay is "disproportionate".

As a member of the financial services compensation scheme, you must pay a share into a pot.

The size of your share depends on your retail deposits and, as we all know, the banks that fell into trouble are those that relied on wholesale money markets to fund their business.

So the institutions with more deposits must pay more for the excesses of those who could fairly be described as greedy.

In one conversation, Ian Ward, the chief executive of Leeds Building Society, pointed out that not one penny of taxpayers' money has ever been needed to save a building society.

If a society has experienced any local difficulties, it has always been sorted out within the sector, he said.

"Building societies pleasingly are extremely sound and very prudent," added Ward.

It has been said many, many times before, but I will say it again. If only everyone else had been so careful, we would not be in this mess today.



n THE race to buy the stricken retailer Woolworths is thrilling to watch.

The stakes are high, with 815 stores, 30,000 employees and debts worth an estimated £385m.

Yesterday I was told that more than 100 different parties have expressed an interest in the retail and wholesale divisions of Woolworths.

That is an astonishing level of interest for a sector that is supposedly struggling.

Is it surprising? Not in itself. Woolworths is an iconic brand synonymous with the British high street.

Recession or no recession, an opportunity to buy such a historic brand at such a low price rarely comes along.

There is of course another motive for the interest.

Among those 815 stores will be a couple of hundred that are profit making, along with a couple of hundred more that could be turned around, with the right management.

The major retailers are circling like sharks, interested in the profitable stores that make money.

Big-hitters named so far include Tesco, Sainsbury's, Asda and Iceland, discount stores Wilkinson and Poundland, and other retailers including Boots and New Look.

Garry Wilson of Endless, the Leeds-based turnaround firm that has thrown its hat into the ring, believes this poses a danger to the future of Woolies.

He told me yesterday: "The danger to the business is that all the best stores could get cherry-picked by the retailers.

"That means that the rump you left is not attractive. 400 stores might be bought out of administration, but none of them might be called Woolworths."

Is the brand worth saving? That depends on who you ask. The business has been around for 99 years.

It might be saddled with debts and have significant issues with cash flow and rental payments, but an entrepreneur with a gift for retail could turn it around.

It would inspire confidence in the rest of this beleaguered sector to see someone come in and make Woolies a success again.

The chain clearly needs it; its offering is confused, with aisles of brightly-coloured junk food next to comparatively over-priced CDs, DVDs, stationery and household goods.

There's a great opportunity here, for the right buyer.

In the last few months, it seemed that Woolies would not make it to 100. But the massive level of interest shown in the group since it went into administration offers a real glimmer of hope for the future.