money over a number of years. But Minos had gone under and Wennerström could not be blamed for it. Here the state guarantees kicked in, and Wennerström was indemnified. All he needed to do was pay back the money that was lost when Minos went under, and he could also show that he had lost a corresponding amount of his own money.â
âLet me see if I understand this correctly. The government supplied billions in tax money, and diplomats to open doors. Industries got the money and used it to invest in joint ventures from which they later reaped vast profits. In other words, business as usual.â
âYouâre a cynic. The loans were supposed to be paid back to the state.â
âYou said that they were interest-free. So that means the taxpayers got nothing at all for putting up the cash. Wennerström got sixty million, and invested fifty-four million of it. What happened to the other six million?â
âWhen it became clear that the AIA project was going to be investigated, Wennerström sent a cheque for six million to AIA for the difference. So the matter was settled, legally at least.â
âIt sounds as though Wennerström frittered away a little money for AIA. But compared with the half billion that disappeared from Skanska or the CEO of ABBâs golden parachute of more than a billion kronorâwhich really upset peopleâthis doesnât seem to be much to write about,â Blomkvist said. âTodayâs readers are pretty tired of stories about incompetent speculators, even if itâs with public funds. Is there more to the story?â
âIt gets better.â
âHow do you know all this about Wennerströmâs deals in Poland?â
âI worked at Handelsbanken in the nineties. Guess who wrote the reports for the bankâs representative in AIA?â
âAha. Tell me more.â
âWell, AIA got their report from Wennerström. Documents were drawn up. The balance of the money had been paid back. That six million coming back was very clever.â
âGet to the point.â
âBut, my dear Blomkvist, that
is
the point. AIA was satisfied with Wennerströmâs report. It was an investment that went to hell, but there was no criticism of the way it had been managed. We looked at invoices and transfers and all the documents. Everything was meticulously accounted for. I believed it. My boss believed it. AIA believed it, and the government had nothing to say.â
âWhereâs the hook?â
âThis is where the story gets ticklish,â Lindberg said, looking surprisingly sober. âAnd since youâre a journalist, this is off the record.â
âCome off it. You canât sit there telling me all this stuff and then say I canât use it.â
âI certainly can. What Iâve told you so far is in the public record. You can look up the report if you want. The rest of the storyâwhat I havenât told youâyou can write about, but youâll have to treat me as an anonymous source.â
âOK, but âoff the recordâ in current terminology means that Iâve been told something in confidence and canât write about it.â
âScrew the terminology. Write whatever the hell you want, but Iâm your anonymous source. Are we agreed?â
âOf course,â Blomkvist said.
In hindsight, this was a mistake.
âAll right then. The Minos story took place more than a decade ago, just after the Wall came down and the Bolsheviks starting acting like decent capitalists. I was one of the people who investigated Wennerström, and the whole time I thought there was something damned odd about his story.â
âWhy didnât you say so when you signed off on his report?â
âI discussed it with my boss. But the problem was that there wasnât anything to pinpoint. The documents were all OK, I had only to sign the report. Every time Iâve