That bloomin' pension again
The negotiations between Royal Bank of Scotland's new chairman, Sir Philip Hampton, and the bank's former chief executive, Sir Fred Goodwin, over Sir Fred's sensational pension deal have descended into near farce.
Sir Philip has been trying to persuade Sir Fred that it would be in his interest to voluntarily give up some of his £16.9m pension pot.
He's told Sir Fred on several occasions - the last time around a week ago - that it would be good for his reputation to make the sacrifice and good for the battered bank's.
On each occasion, Sir Fred has said he would ponder.
But the pondering has prompted nothing in the way of deeds - presumably because Sir Fred has made the reasonable calculation that whatever stain there may be on his reputation in the UK is unlikely to be washed away by any kind of self-denying gesture of this sort.
However, as I reported on 17 March, there was one exception to this immovability - which was in respect of a lump sum paid to Sir Fred.
I pointed out that Sir Fred had already received a £2.7m cash lump sum from his pension fund, thus reducing his annual pension payment (which he's already receiving, aged 50) from £703,000 to £555,000.
He was able to take this substantial sum tax free, under the terms of his pension arrangements with Royal Bank - the bank had agreed to pay the tax liability of considerably more than £1m on the payment.
Now, Sir Philip did persuade Sir Fred to repay the lump sum, but subject to an important condition - which is that Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs would have to agree not to levy tax on the initial payment.
This waiver from HMRC was necessary, for the obvious reason that neither Royal Bank or Sir Fred wanted to face a stonking tax bill on a lump sum he had given back.
Royal Bank was hopeful that HMRC would be happy to pretend that the original payment had never taken place.
It was wrong: HMRC has refused to play ball.
The tax authority has told RBS that even if Sir Fred gives the money back, it will still demand more than £1m in tax from him. Apparently, if it weren't to do this, an unfortunate precedent would be set.
So, after all that, it doesn't look as though Sir Fred will repay the tax-free lump sum.
He'll probably keep the £2.7m and will continue to receive £555,000 a year.
We're back to where we started on all this.
And for those of you bored witless by this saga (and I know there are lots of you who are in this category), I will endeavour to return to it only if something of genuine moment were to occur (and I honestly can't think what that would be).
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~22~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Is it not possible to pay this pension with the "toxic assets", rather than money, which he brought into RBS? Then indeed he would be reaping what he sowed.
Complain about this comment
Morally I disagree, legally a contract is a contract. If all had gone well, would there have been such a fuss - I don't think so.
As for Fred and the bank's reputation - a bit late for that now. RBS was/is technically insolvent, isn't that a crime? It was when I was studying UK Company Law.
Complain about this comment
This must be one of the first times that "fearless reporting" means fearless in the face of ones own blog followers!
Complain about this comment
AAAAAAAAArrrrrrrrrggggghhhhhh. No more.
Complain about this comment
This guy is his own worse enemy.
If he didn't want to give a percentage back to the bank why didn't he divde it up amongst some charities as they are suffering in the recession as well.
Complain about this comment
I'm amazed Sir Philip thought he could get HMRC to add another change in pension legislation when we've had 700 changes and thousands of pages since 1995. For those of us dealing with pensions day in and day out we knew this.
Complain about this comment
THis is just HMRC being jobsworths.
THis isnt setting any precedent in reality.
He would have effectively going back to day one of his pension and not drawing a lump sum, therefore no tax to pay.
If anything the bad precedent has already been set, namely that his company is paying what should have been a personal liability
Complain about this comment
C'mon Sir Fred: spend some of that 2.7 million squid on some PR from Max Clifford's agency.
The Public are so fickle that before you know it you will be a hero climbing Mount Kilomanjaro and raising cash for charidee.
Complain about this comment
Fred who?
Complain about this comment
Sir Fred goodwin failed to spot the danger for the bank and everyone wants to punish him. Gordon Brown failed to spot the danger for a whole economy, so when he is going to be made to pay back his earnings and forego his pension? Or is this another case where people have to be the scapegoats so politicians can get away with their incompetence. How many MP's are still sticking their snouts as deep in the trough as they can with claims for "expenses" for their parents houses and a nice payrise well above inflation while their constituents are made jobless and homeless. Time the anger was directed where it belongs - at the politicians and civikl service fatcats who ignored what was happening because they were too busy feathering their own nests!
Complain about this comment
And what is 1 million in tax to any of these guys anyway?
The whole lot of them are absolutely pathetic specimens - if only Damien could soak him in some formaldehyde, along with all his banking mates. that would be an alternative to flogging as discussed in the previous blog.
If not banishment to a very low lying island with all his wealth. Some melting icebergs will demonstrate to them all the errors of their thinking soon enough
Now can we have some news on how the G20 gabbing shop will sort out unemployment, if at all?
Complain about this comment
Just when I thought the smoke screen was clearing.....
.....it's that bloomin' Peston again.....
.....with that bloomin' blog again.....
.....about that bloomin' pension again!
Robert, I really can't take these distractions from the real stories that are happening out there and to think you're going to string it out for the next 13 months.
Please!
Government, and Myners in particular, cocked up. It's a bore but what's done is done. Unless Fred wants to offer to reduce his pension, perhaps round down from £703,000 to £700,000, then there is nothing we, you or dear old Harriet can do anything about it.
By the way, how much is the government currently paying Cherie to see if the 'court of public opinion' will be satisfied with the possibility of a legal bar to Fred's retirement fund.
And as for her lying low husband (no double entendre intended), I haven't heard about Tony in a long time; it must be that JP Morgan £5 million pounds annual non-executive salary keeping him busy. Now there's a story, Robert!
Complain about this comment
So here's a question.
I was made redundant from RBs last year and prmised a particular sum including profit share, which at the time of the severance was"gauranteed".
How come Fred gets his full severance yet they are not paying mine?
Complain about this comment
Seriously though, over the course of the last few weeks I have laid off over 50% of my staff, had my marriage of 9 years break down and just this last Monday, ratified a pay CUT of £31k for MYSELF - all either wholly or in part as a consequence of the climate of economic fear precipitated by Sir Fred (amongst many others). My house is on the line and my wife (the irony) is employed by RBS!!
At some point we simply have to get on with turning things around and moving on with our lives - Sir Fred and his ilk will suffer in some way - even the simple matter of being ostracised will cut somebody with the gargantuan ego of Fred Goodwin to the quick, since personalities like his NEED to be adored!
The sooner we begin to ignore the berks who have brought us to our knees and adopt a more positive, forward looking approach, the sooner we can clear up this mess!
Summer's on it's way, the light at the end of the tunnel may just have been switched back on and we may have learned a few valuable lessons - I'm not going to fall out with my wife and if I lose my house but keep my company - hey, I can always rent! Life goes on and it aint that bad!!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Actually as I have explained befoe it is rather more complicted. Surely if it was simple why did it take so long to agree on the night in question? And why was the HRM Director present? As RBS claim it was a compromise agreement under the Empoloyment Protection Acti 1993
Such an agreement is a document that records an employee’s agreement not to pursue an employment related claim, such as unfair dismissal or breach of contract. This agreement is usually in exchange for a sum of money.
Such agreements are confidential and no allegations may be made about the circumstances so I won't say what I think. Other than what was done would probably lead to a claim for 'breach of contract' which would be very costly and damaging to the organisation to defend though perhasp the occassion for mre commnets on here.
Shareholders maybe able to sue (how much was the goodwill in the RBS account for the AMBO takeover).
but directors play reposibility to the shareholder v responsibility to the company fast and loose.
So lets let it be
Complain about this comment
Rather than asking Sir Fred to leave (rather than sacking him) and so triggering the enhanced pension calculation, why didn't RBS ask himn to resign (i.e. leave of his own accord)? This wouldn't have triggered the enhanced calculation and if they needed him to stay on until a successor was in place then a consultancy fee could have been arranged (as HBOS did with Andy Hornby).
Complain about this comment
So Fred's still alive ? I would have thought that starting with the Articles and Memorandum of Association, the various minuted meeting of the Remuneration Committee,the minuted meetings of the Executive Committee, the Compliance Committee meetings, that there would have been a slip up to keep Fred unhappy until he is 80. Did I hear or did I dream that Cherie Blair is on the case? I would put Fred's pension on hold until the muck has been turned over ! Anyhow since nobody thinks he should be getting it, then just don't pay. Let him sue us.
Complain about this comment
Robert is wise to promise not to run any more Goodwin stories (whilst running a Goodwin story); we are fed up with hearing about him
It's striking (pun intended) that:
RBS have had billions of poonds of our money and can't be bothered to put decent shatter-proof windows in their City bank buildings, despite bomb- and bullet-proof windows being a City of London requirement (they should be fined for breaking City planning rules)
Fred has millions of poonds of our money and can't be bothered to put decent shatter-proof windows in his Edinburgh gaff; his insurance company should have words with him
What cheapskates; go on, buy some proper windows and stimulate the economy!!
Complain about this comment
It's not so much that we're bored with this episode. It's just with momentous changes to the banks' accounting rules in America ('mark to market') and those same banks considering moves to completely bastardise the TARP facility, there are really more important things to report on other than a continuation of public lynching of Mr Goodwin.
Complain about this comment
Ho hum, I've been volunteering for the Prince's Trust (of which Sir F is chairman) for quite a few years. Along with all the others, I don't get a penny for the petrol, time and telephone costs I spend trying to help young people. I am also a taxpayer, don't expect something for nothing, and don't expect recognition for what I do, just like lots of other volunteers. Sir F, don't you feel just a little bit embarrassed?
Anyway, moving on, let's hope we get more on here about small businesses, like the one I work for, that daren't plan more than 2-3 months ahead. Or maybe the one a good friend ran sucessfully for 9 years, until he had to hand out redundancy to his 12 staff a couple of weeks ago. No fun seeing a grown man weep. Let's concerntrate on the real world, not Gordys' la-la land of meaningless promises.
Thank you. Rant now over. As you were...
Complain about this comment
Again, what has become of "We'll do whatever it takes"? What hypocrites!
Complain about this comment
Robert
There is a problem with all this scenario. You cannot legally change a pension once it's been taken.
He could of course say "I would like to reduce my pension but the law doesn't allow it" which would bang the ball back to the politicians court.
Complain about this comment
Can someoone please explain something to me? I read elsewhere on the BBC's site this morning that "A government agency, as majority shareholder, will register the public's anger at the pension awarded." and "The bank [RBS] do not have accept the shareholders demands".
It is my understanding that the majority shareholder, has sufficient voting power to dictate policy in any way it sees fit, within the bounds of the law of course.
If the majority shareholder does NOT have such voting authority then who does? and how is it determined? I'd appreciate it if Peston could spend some time educating us all.
If the UK taxpayer ("The Government") aquired all that debt under terms that give it zero influence over policy and strategy, then it I would be furious if I were a UK taxpayer, because it means that no provisons can be made to alter the practices that have led to this catastrophe, and that strikes me as idiocy, could the UK Government be impotent to that degree?
I live in the US and run a small software firm there, beleive me the % of stock one owns is THE deciding factor in setting policy, selecting/removing executive officers and so on.
Is it different in the UK?
I did get some more info about this, apparently the Government do not hold a majority of voting shares, only non-voting shares. This begs the question: who DOES hold the majority of voting shares in RBS? Who is setting policy here? It is those who have the authority for setting strategy that are truly accountable, but who are they? does Peston know? does anyone know? I thought RBS was a PLC? Is this not a matter of public record?
What is needed is for someone to headup a committe to aquire support from individuals and groups with a collective majority voting shares, then that committe can set strategy, fire the board and replace it with people that will not hand over 16 Million pounds to an individual whose greed and self interest led to the collapse.
One more thing, if most people have seen their pension devalue with the fall in world share prices, why is Goodwin protected from this?
Surely Goodwin has pursused (demonstrably) self interest over fiduciary responsibility?
I hope they get Goodwin, he is a clever individual, he has played the system and won, but let us stop pretending that he acted as anyone else would, he is calculating and has allowed lives to be destroyed for his own gain, surely it can be proven that he was motivated by self-interest and thus failed to excerices good stewardship, he should be investigated, prosecuted and fined.
Thx
Complain about this comment
RBS should sell off everything that isn't original RBS including the ABN Amro stuff, all the American stuff and of course everything that was NatWest.
Then it could revert to being a regional bank working with the Scottish Govt and Scottish industry in order to grow the Scottish economy.
Complain about this comment
A 'Good Win' for Mr Fred indeed. Goodwin by name, goodwin by nature....
Take Fred's lmp sum and add on the tax RBS were going to pay - that totals £3.7m.
Or employment for 148 people at £25k per year (excluding on costs).
In a normal SME the owner is also the director/person running the business takes the risks and rewards and ultimately by taking those risks he gives the 'gift' of employment to his employees. When times are tough he may be forced to take that 'gift' away. This is not how it actually feels - you employ people to make money and when you can't make any money you have to save costs to survive but both descriptions are valid I think.
However in the plc's the shareholders have risk and reward but the directors seem to have reward and more reward and if the shareholders remove the 'gift' of employment then they replace it with an even greater financial gift. Meanwhile further down the employment ladder hundreds of people lose their jobs to fund the pension payouts.
If I were Mr Good Win I could not sleep at night out of guilt.
As it is I suspect Mr Good Win can not sleep at night for worry that his life is in danger due to the constant Media harrassment and focus. Mr Good Win is one of very many overpaid and overrewarded bankers - if he is burnt at the stake he should not be alone on the fire.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Sir Fred, eh?
For me the real issue is - will his replacement, Sir Phillip, be any better? (Not in respect of his own pocket and gain, but for the people of the UK and for his Bank's shareholders (including taxpayers) and customers.
I do hope so, as I've never really quite bought the thing that Sir F was a marvellous banker and it was only that horrid Dutch Bank thing that caused the problem.
Maybe the problem isn't in the individuals, maybe it's in the whole banking 'way of life'.
Or is that a bit like blaming the gun for a lack of morality, rather than the person who wields it?
Complain about this comment
Will we be able to apply the same conditions to those working for the FSA and the current government incumbents?
The pension is entirely the fault of Brown, Darling, and Myners. Please hold them accountable. This horse has well and truly bolted, and the stable, paddock, and county are empty (lawfully)
Complain about this comment
#24 Governage:
I cannot believe we put all that money in and have no voting shares.
What is going on?
The same old incompetents can give the taxpayer the finger.
What do UKFI say about this?
Complain about this comment
As a peripheral player in the finance industry, it was clear to me that RBS and Goodwin could have stopped their acquisition spree after Nat West and he and RBS would have been hailed as one the great success stories of the last decade. However the epithet now reads: "Never in the field of commercial history has so much been owed to so many by so few".
Complain about this comment
I for one don't blame Sir Fred Goodwin one little bit. He has been shafted good and proper by the government - made to shoulder the blame for Golem Brown's "boom and bust".
And it's not like Jacqui Smith is giving back any of the money she claimed for her "second home" allowance, is it? And is Golem Brown going to give up his pension. Not on your life.
If I were Sir Fred, I'd up sticks and move abroad. There'll be a lot of better places to live than in the dystopian wasteland created by Golem Brown and his cronies.
Complain about this comment
If anyone was daft enough to provide me with such a pension as Goodwin has they would have a helluva job getting that back too.
Far to many other less than stellar folk in the country with such ridiculous pension agreements, to single one out is a nice diversion but ineffective.
Now what about all the pensions that have been swiped from ordinary folk?, I have lost 2, quite a nice one dissapeared with T&N.
Pension robbery is legal here in the UK, just have to live with it, retire either poor or as rich as Goodwin nothing much in between works.
Complain about this comment
bring into law the crime of Economic Sabotage. Make it both a capital offence and retro-spective.
There problem solved and the boil of public anger lanced
Complain about this comment
"And for those of you bored witless by this saga (and I know there are lots of you who are in this category), I will endeavour to return to it only if something of genuine moment were to occur (and I honestly can't think what that would be)."
Why should being bored or not being bored have anything to do with it? We're not surely dealing with entertainment here, are we? Those who don't wish to glean any further knowledge about Goodwin's pension have no need to read any further pieces about it.
You write of "genuine moment", and I'd suggest that of genuine moment is how important to business reporting is the continued widespread reporting of a totally emotional feud between the masses and an individual - an event that has no relevance whatsoever to the functioning of business, adds nothing to the explanation of what has gone wrong in the financial world and contributes nothing towards determining the best way out of this problem.
I'm not suggesting for one minute that the BBC shouldn't give coverage to matters that are of concern to large numbers of people, but I think we should be worried that this section of the population is not being challenged in its belief that concentration on the minutiae of one-off events is an entirely appropriate way for society to govern itself.
Being venomous about Goodwin's pension may be a very good way for the powerless to vent their emotions, but as a contribution towards what's needed for society to progress it's absolutely meaningless. Let's not be confused that the two are the same, eh?
Complain about this comment
I see that the BBC still can't come to terms with the £ sign. Let's see if the € symbol works...
Hmm...
Complain about this comment
C'mon Robert move on. As referred to above by Fingerbob69, how about something on the US easing up on "mark to market", surely this is more important, or don't you have a source on this?
Good of Citigroup to say the change will have no impact on their reported figures - what are the odds on better than expected quarterly figures coming from them then?
Also well said Graham Ward at 14, positive thinking, that's good to see. Hope things work out well on your various fronts.
Complain about this comment
-- "And for those of you bored witless by this saga (and I know there are lots of you who are in this category), I will endeavour to return to it only if something of genuine moment were to occur (and I honestly can't think what that would be)" --
If only. Change the record: though Goodwin's pension award is grotesque, endlessly covering the subject and neglecting more important issues demonstrates a sorry lack of focus in this blog (either intentionally or unintentionally).
Complain about this comment
If I was Sir Fred I would be looking to do a deal. In return for giving up some dosh, I would want carte blanche to blow the gaff on Gordon Brown's culpability and bury Brown's economic and political reputation (what's left of it) for good.
On you go Sir Fred!
Complain about this comment
#30
I am plain confused. It seems that the government stake is actually ORDINARY shares, which DO carry a voting right (it also seems that RBS agreed to swap preference shares for ordinary sharesm, which gave the government their current holding).
So, I ask again, why do the BBC report that the government cannot force "The Bank" to do their bidding when they a) are the majority shareholder and b) those share do (it seems) carry a voting right?
Can someone (Peston?) please explain this?
Thx
Complain about this comment
He knows where the bodies are buried and so WILL be receiving his full, albeit obscenely inflated, pension. It's just 'top-of-the-greasy-pole" folk scratching each other's backs.
Are we surprised? Do not bears poo in the woods?
Complain about this comment
Here we go again, the BBC are reporting this right now:
"RBS, which does not have to make any changes as a result, said it was a "substantive" protest vote at Sir Fred Goodwin's £703,000 a year pension."
This is the report that says 90% of shareholders have cast a vote about bank pay and pension policy.
I really would like to know why "The Bank" are not under a legal obligation to follow the voting system that underpins share ownership.
Is this just another example of the UK being a total, utter joke?
Thx
Complain about this comment
Moving on from the Fred story to the post-coital G20 situation - apologies if that creates any unhappy images of Brown-Obama or Sarkozy-Merkel :(
The NY Times seems less than impressed; they reckon that in the absence of a US recovery that will involve buying lots of imports, the rest of us have no choice but to launch more stimulation packages (where they can be afforded)
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/03/opinion/03fri1.html?hp
Also see that Mr Roubini reckons we're still deep in the woods with the bears, and that the stock market has gotten way ahead of itself here
http://business.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090403.wrroubini03/BNStory/Business/home?cid=al_gam_mostview
hey but at least we've annoyed the Swiss and other tax havens
it's Friday night so I'm off down the Jolly Roger to buy every member of my crew a pint of the best Old Dunlendin' and we'll be keel-hauling some landlubbers later on
Complain about this comment
I have an idea.
Let’s all of pretend that the whole G20 dance was the huge world saving success that our naked emperors have declared it to be. That the empty rhetoric that poured out of it was meat rather than the usual thin and tasteless watery soup.
Let’s allow them their one last self-serving lie. After all, what’s one more fib floating on a polluted ocean of broken promises, spin, deceptions and falsehoods?
Let’s pretend that this time it’s actually going to work (when really we all know it won’t).
Let’s give them a few months, maybe as much as six, and then, when the whole rotten charade begins to fall apart on us like the cheap gimmick it is, let’s have the bloody revolution our society needs, let's really have it, in full, in glorious Technicolor, like the final horrible stomach pumping a comatose drunk would get to save their life. The final horrible purging that’s necessary before the long recovery can begin.
It’s the only way that they ever learn. The only.
No more lies.
It’s just an idea.
Complain about this comment
I missed the blog about the G20 summit so I'm going to be 'naughty' and slip one in here.
One trillion sounds like an awful lot but it is 'only' (hahaha - i can't believe i'm writing this) one thousand billion!
Now if we are still in the early days of this crisis and Mexico is already looking for a loan of 47 billion then there are 'only' 953 billion left OR another 19 Mexicos - all of a sudden it doesn't sound so much?
Complain about this comment
As with most super rich people they are out of touch with the public's feeling towards them.
So Sir Fred's reaction comes at no surprise.He may think about giving some money back but that's all he will do....
Maybe he like's being the most disliked ex-banker in the UK if not the world....
Complain about this comment
"for those of you bored witless by this saga ..."
No, no, Robert - it's great sport: worthy of a fine comedian - Bernard Cribbins, no less !
Complain about this comment
The whole nation wants Fred Goodwin to be punished for his destruction of RBS.
We NEED Fred Goodwin to be punished.
We YEARN for Fred Goodwin to be punished.
SOMETHING has to be done about Fred Goodwin and his pension.
It will provide some degree of balm for our financial wounds.
That picture of this criminally incompetent man, smiling smugly on his mobile phone, haunts and aggravates us all.
There has to be seen to be SOME justice in this world.
Complain about this comment
43. At 5:40pm on 03 Apr 2009, somali_pirate_SP500 wrote:
..... at least we've annoyed the Swiss and other tax havens.
_____________________________________________________________
Now there's an idea. War with Switzerland and Lichtenstein. We should be able to actually win that one. Good thinking, brain. Better still, Jersey!
Complain about this comment
Robert
'And for those of you bored witless by this saga (and I know there are lots of you who are in this category), I will endeavour to return to it only if something of genuine moment were to occur (and I honestly can't think what that would be).'
The government have significantly mis-handled the banking/Goodwin pension fiasco and it seems most unlikley that the government lawyers will find a solution and indeed the bank itself are keen to brush this one under the carpet as the remaining bankers wish to ringfence their own pensions.
A series of genuine moments are I think quite likely to occur in as much as the opposition parties will not let this one go as they quite rightly smell blood and there appears to be immense political capital in attacking Goondog Trillionaiare Brown and his 'spin machine'.
Unless fraud or criminal negligence are proven 2 or 3 years down the line at immense cost to the taxpayer in legal fees (as the outline case in contract) does not look strong against Goodwin - the only other option which I have mentioned previously - is for the Chancellor to go after Goodwin's pension in the next budget in the form of a penalty tax against e.g. bankers pensions etc - but you might have guessed it - would be difficult because of EEC law and Human Rights Act which this New Labour government introduced against discrimination etc.
This would need a particularly bold and competent Chancellor wishing to really make a name for himself and to introduce a new tax effectively on corporate greed.
This is a mess and for which New Labour/Brown government are entirely to blame and the nation is watching and waiting to see some justice dished out here either by way of legal proceedings, special session of Parliament and or a new and aggressive tax law grab that would have to be retrospective to be effective. Or better still the justice might be dished out at the General Election and whilst it may bore some now - it is something that I think most will remember when the time comes to put that little cross on the ballot paper.
A fine old mess for Gordon Brown and not even Lord Sleaze himself looks able to pull a rabbit out of the hat on this one!
I for one am not in any way bored at all with the story and to Fred Goodwin - Good luck Sir! The very best of British with your tax evasion - Oops sorry ... I meant tax avoidance! (Never mind I suppose he's sunning himself with a G & T in one of Goondog Brown's new tax havens that will escape the G20 measures - wheeling and dealing behind the scenes OECD - skeletons rattling again in the cupboard.)
The other point about tax avoidance/evasion is that there may already be a bank on the space shuttle orbiting the earth or similar as would be outside of global tax control so no doubt Robert you'll soon be sent into orbit to investigate the new electronic currency for tax avoidance in outer space? Is that where all the money has gone? I bet Goondog didn't think of that did he at the G20 summit? All those Russians floating about upside down counting their lolly! No wonder the Chinese and Koreans are in a hurry to send more and more satellites into space!
Again the problem with money is that no one really knows how much is in circulation in respect of all of the different global currencies - Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
Complain about this comment
Fred Goodwin is a an asset stripper and Lord Myner the truth knew all about it as did Gordon wait till he goes another one who will fill his boots like Blair for having no worth wile talent but conning and lying to all but his chosen few. He is now talking of a New World I wonder were Fred will be in this as he is not retirement age yet so he will have to be chief something or other were he gets a lot of money. The whole of the world has been fleeced well raped really and we all look on shell shocked as it happened so quick but as I said before is there a way out of this and make people forget, simple war. there is now a move in the media to romanize the hardship of the war with dig for victory program and we the fleeced ones have to enjoy putting out the lights and sitting with blankest around us and eating less and giving or blood and other bits to the Govenment to sell and bring our kids up to want to kill or be killed in other countries not here were the police have powers unheard off even in war, we have MPs who are changing us for everything from sex to sinks and we look on with open mouths asking why? well the answer is because they can. Fred Goodwin is small fry compared to others we will learn off and the so called Labour Party has lost it way and if we are forced to take on the Tories we will all be in prison unless we can pay.
Complain about this comment
#45 grimupnorth did you see the Mexican finance minister on Newsnight? I think he must be EATING his way through their entire budget; the IMF should put him on a diet for his own good
#49 Cassandra Britain seems to concentrate on fighting wars with mountainous land-locked countries at the moment so the Swiss and Lichtenstein fit the bill; the Swiss have a heavily armed citizen's army though, so might be a bit like the Taleban and victory uncertain
Complain about this comment
#35 ExcellenceFirst "We're not surely dealing with entertainment here, are we?"
Well, "Bread and Circuses" is a well established method of keeping the masses quiet. To contribute to the circus, I have attempted a poem in the style of the famous Scottish poet:
William McGonagall, celebrated as possibly the worst poet ever in the English langauage.
It was in the year of our Lord, two thousand and nine,
which will be remembered by all of us for a very long time,
that the Royal Bank of Scotland was declared to be a disaster.
wrecked by auld Sir Fred Goodwin who had been its master.
He was considered a disgrace to the entire Scottish nation,
until now considered masters of wealth creation,
but from the taxpayer RBS needed a mighty donation,
as Fred was really only a master of master "self-delusion".
So RBS was bailed out by PM Gordon Brown,
thought by many to be rather a clown.
Yet nobody laughed as it wasn't really funny,
because his treasury didn't actually have any money.
And Sir Fred himself was made to walk the plank,
obviously unfit to manage a bank.
But do not weep for poor sacked Sir Shred,
for who needs a job, when you can have loads of money for nothing instead?
My feeling is that this offering could be improved upon - or in the true McGonagall tradition, made worse. Help please?
Complain about this comment
* 24, 40, 42 Governage: "So, I ask again, why do the BBC report that the government cannot force "The Bank" to do their bidding when they a) are the majority shareholder and b) those share do (it seems) carry a voting right?"
Thank you for your questions and persistence. We are about to see yet another emperor with no clothes on if we get an answer!
I'm not in the least bit bored by the repeated bulletins on Goodwin and the government. Here we have the essence of all that's wrong with the banks, and if we can nail this one, we can nail the rest.
In fact, if the government cannot deal with Sir Fred, why should we believe that they can deal with anything?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Most of us would think we were rich if we had a windfall of £10,000. When has it ever been acceptable for someone to have a pension far above what he needs? Why should Sir Fred have a yearly pension just for himself, which, divided up, could be distributed among 40 people and keep them in comfort for the year? I suggest he starts a company employing state pensioners and redistributes his pension in topping up theirs. Is he worth so much more than the rest of us? Or has the world of finance become so far removed from reality that this pension is considered realistic and acceptable by bankers and financiers? I thought a pension was supposed to keep you in comfort when you are to old or unfit to work. Sir Fred's pension must surely put him among the world's super rich. Perhaps he owes us all a regular account of his daily life and what he is doing with his money in the tabloids.
Complain about this comment
Heard of the grapevine today that the rather ETHICAl Co-Op bank has increased the number of accounts by 70 per cent.
I think that number should be quite a bit higher - so the only way to make it clear to the RBS board and the politicians is to shift your account and other business away from companies such as RBS.
Somali sounds like a good way to slow the increase in unemployment with your 'keel-hauling some landlubbers' activities. Happy drinking matey...
Complain about this comment
I think good fredwin is brilliant, he shows up what a pathetic corrupt system we are all actually living in. some old girl gets done 50 quid for being late with the council tax and these blokes are getting away with murder...brilliant.
Complain about this comment
REMOVED POST!!!
SO SORRY FOR SUGGESTING THERE SHOULD BE JUSTICE?
IT WONT BE LONG BEFORE THE PUBLIC DISHES IT OUT!!
THEN THERE WILL BE A HUGE PROBLEM!
Complain about this comment
Give us a break, no more about Fred. When are we going to stop messing about and explore the judicial process. As I said before where was the FSA where was the Treasury etc etc. Where are the investigations. Wonder why no action? Why no investigation Robert? Is it because the regulators are ex bankers, will they be exposed. Is the club closing ranks and riding out the storm. As long as you go on about Fred they are not under any scrutiny.
Complain about this comment
I'm also getting a bit fed up with FG. The annoying thing for me as a small business owner and large mortgage payer is that if I win the National Lottery tomorrow I'll still be several million behind this guy! The big thing that really must come out of this lesson learned is closer attention by the FSA to current and potential rewards to bankers in line with performance. All for remuneration aligned to risk but FG and others have emptied the 'trough' in my view.
Complain about this comment
The obvious thing for Sir F to do then is give the lump sum to a charity and claim the tax relief thereon acordingly - win, win, win!
Complain about this comment
I can't believe it, but I've finally been goaded to register by some of the stuff on here!
Many of the "remedies" being suggested on this and previous articles lead me to believe that, if the contributors saw Fred Goodwin on a bus, they'd ram it! Shame about the other passengers, and yes both my legs are broken, but, hey, we got Fred!
I mean, come on! Most of the actions suggested would end up causing more damage to you and me than Sir FG could have done, even given another ten years in the job.
Retrospective law changes? Good idea! Let's implement the rumoured reduction in the national speed limit and then prosecute everyone who ever drove at 70. That'll soon refill the Government coffers.
I see some want to tell the Government that they can impose extra taxes on pensions (retrospectively again). How well with that threshold keep up with inflation? As well as Inheritance Tax has I'd guess.
Now we want a binding retrospective vote at RBS's AGM.
Whatever the RBS director's did last year, provided it was within the terms of the M & A, they had the authority to do it at the time. They were given that when they were elected. Today's vote says "we don't like what you did", and holds the unspoken threat, " and you'd better not plan do anything like it again, or you're out!" And quite right too, but don't try to change the rules after the event, because if it can be done to "them", etc.. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't be inspired to exert myself too hard for an employer or bunch of shareholders who, at the end of the year, turn and say "Sorry, we don't like what you did, we want your wages back." (Actually, that's what bonuses were invented for, so now we have no carrot OR stick!)
At #48 noninflatable claims to speak for the whole nation, Well "not in my name" as they say. I'm an RBS shareholder, I've seen my (modest) holding lose over 95% of its value, and am distinctly unhappy with FG and the rest of the board. But, before we even think about punishment, I've not yet heard a convincing case that FG, or anyone else, has been guilty of anything other than execrable judgement (until all those retrospective law changes of course), so accusations of criminality are certainly premature and probably slanderous. We supposedly have a presumption of innocence (or do we want that to go as well for the sake of a few days smug satisfaction?) until conviction and he hasn't been charged with anything.
I sincerely doubt that he could have been legally fired, as he would certainly claim that he had the backing of the Board for his actions, and therefore a strong case for an action for unfair dismissal.
From information in the public domain, his pension, and the enhancement, are strictly in line with RBS pension fund rules. So, as for the suggestions that it should be withheld and challenge him to sue! Great, give RBS a precedent to tear up agreements, wait a while then, when he's won, pay him the pension, with interest plus all the legal costs including his!
Right, so we have retrospective law changes, retrospective tax changes, pay can be clawed back by miffed shareholders, retrospective changes to agreed pensions are OK, and the presumption of innocence can go out of the window. Fred's pension or punishment will have very little material effect on anyone but him, but that lot are REALLY worth worrying about.
Face up to it, Fred is going to get his pension, in full, unless he chooses otherwise. He isn't going to face charges and neither is anyone else on the RBS board. (OK, maybe some minor unrelated misdemeanour will be turned up by chance. I'll give you that!).
That's how it's going to be, live with it and move on.
Finally, there's not a snowball's chance of success for the crackpot attempt at litigation over the Rights issue. They might have proved to be incompetent bankers, but you can bet the store that they had good lawyers putting together that enterprise and a watertight case should the figures be challenged.
As I said earlier, I'm an RBS shareholder and say to the RBS Shareholders Action Group, "it's our fault"! We elected the directors(if only by apathy)they appointed FG and Johnny Cameron and we sat back happily as the share price rose tenfold in ten years and the dividends rolled in. So it's only fair that we should have stumped up when things went sticky. It's our fault and it's time to accept our responsibility.
The nation "yearns" and "needs" Fred Goodwin to be punished?
For pity's sake!
You have a very poor opinion of your compatriots.
Complain about this comment
Robert,
This topic is just so boring now, please move on. Didn't the G20 meet yesterday? Do you not have anything relevant or interesting to say about that? In reality, this pension matters only to Fred. Global recovery affects us all, yet you persist in blogging about it once again tediously today. I check you blog so much less now than I once did, due to your insistance that this severance deal some how matters. It does not. Move on, like the rest of us are doing and seeking our way through the new order.
Complain about this comment
I am not a "new member". Sort it out, BBC.
Complain about this comment
#53 sashaclarkson
Beyond improvement.
Brilliant composition.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
There must be dozens of less offesive images of Fred the Shred available for the BBC to post on this site.
Please remove the self-gratifying image currently gracing the blog.
Complain about this comment
53# Well done Sasha you are now the worst poet in the English language,you don't need any help the evidence is there for all to see.
Complain about this comment
Did Fred have a contract of employment, if so, did he fulfill his duty under that contract of employment. Concidering the plight of RBS under his leadership I doubt he could argue that he had met the requirements of his contract.
I am not an expert in these matters but it does appear rather strange that anyone can bring a company to its knees, and still walk away with a protected pension scheme. The fact that he has made decisions that have resulted in the downfall of RBS must be seen as a breach of contract. Although his pension may be a seperate issue they must be seen as conected, and possibly could be regarded as a motive for taking reckless action, as he was more protected than his employer in any wrong doing.
I can not see any reason for a case in the courts not to be persued for claiming back his pension, or for that matter his over inflated wages. Minimum wage for this crook would be more appropriate.
As with the court case regarding banks unfairly charging customers regarding fees, there must be a precident here, but as with the aforementioned case no one wants to admit wrong doing or law breaking.
Lets get real Fred the shred took RBS for millions and is going to walk away with his ill gotten gains because no one has the balls to stop it. What a bunch off loosers.
Complain about this comment
#69 jolo13
I'm with you - but I think we should enlist the help of somali_pirate_SP500 and substitute the plank for the naughty step.
His final message to J Woss would be worth the licence fee.
Wun wabbitt, wun, wabbit, wun, wun,wun.
Then you'd hear a distant voice saying " "Gosh it's wather wet down here"!
Six million a year! - I wouldn't pay him in washers.
Complain about this comment
Perhaps with all the Income Tax he will be paying the Chancellor could let us poor pensioners off Income Tax altogether.
Complain about this comment
Oh dear me! Think I preferred the tea and croissant story!
Robert, we get it, ok?
Freddie stitched us all up-simple. Does anyone REALLY think he will give a penny back? Let alone be MADE to give of back? And as for HMRC turning a blind eye? Oh, come off it!
There's no way Freddie will have left ANY kind of loop hole!
Now then, do try and wean off bank stories. How about all the missing tax and NIC from football clubs?
Or small businesses surviving/going under? What about all the new technology and R and D for the future of a country needing to secure a future for it's children?
What about the true figures of the public purse? The massive 'success' of the G20?
Plenty of food for thought there then?
There's a thought for u!
Complain about this comment
That blue ming pension eggain
Sir humpty dumped sat on the wool
Sir humpty dumped had a great fool
But all Kings horses and all Kings men
Couldn't take Sir Fried EGOS wreckovary away again
Complain about this comment
Well, Gordon's worldwide campaign to collect other powerful leaders into a first meeting and agreement into concerted action has worked so far. The poor in our country and those of the other G20 members have been given a sign that their leaders are truly concerned!
Whoops, I forgot the presence of those International Quango heads with no electorate that represents those poor directly. The G30 ish?
All the other countries, the non G 134 [or so] are sure to be trusting of Gordon's plans to help their poor by more massive spending.
Actually, I see no better peaceful resolution than this and, whilst not monitoring all markets, see some temporary return of confidence in the future. Careful, volumes are low!
In political terms this is equivalent to a low voter turnout. The G20 leaders are all politicians from disparate political systems and of varying future lives of personal political power.
It's a monumental gamble on scales that the bankers, who caused the mess, could not have envisaged. With regulation, they'll never be given that chance again otherwise Sir Badlose's pension will look like laughable peanuts compared to future financial recompense and to future world citizens still trying to live on a dollar per day.
N.
Complain about this comment
Banking ,where liesir Doolittle types learn how to say How now Brown cow AND GET MORE THAN A PAT ON THE HEAD.
Complain about this comment
Seeing as all the other BBC blogs and have-your-say pages have closed the subjects of the G20, I thought I might post here just in case the BBC wanted to get any feedback on the issue.
After all, a trillion dollars is a lot of money and worth a second look.
I was just curious if the BBC has any plans to report the fact that the trillion dollars which Brown duped the world into thinking was new money, was in fact not new money at all, and was just a double-counting/obfuscation exercise and that the whole thing was basically just a giant scam by Brown?
Duping the poorest countries of the world out of a trillion dollars is, in my humble opinion, a fairly important and newsworthy issue.
Complain about this comment
#63 I1vw1th1t
A very eloquent summary of the situation. Very honest, "It is all our fault", but could have been written by Sir Fred himself.
The strength of your self denegration does you justice, but are you suggesting a change in the nature of capitalisation of business? In your own words this mess is caused by shareholders who do not ask questions, not all the time dividends are rolling in. So, does this suggest that external capitalisation of business is at fault. As you and your fellow shareholders have shown yourselves to be unable to make critical judgements of those you employ to increase your investments, maybe you have lost the right to hold those investments and they should be transfered to the depositors and borrowers of the bank. Run it as a mutual. The same could be done with all business. Transfer the ownership of business to those that work in it, and run them as co-operatives.
Complain about this comment
whats browns favourite saying is it"I intend to end boom and bust" or is it "we need global solutions to solve global problems" or "the tory party is the do nothing party" and "we will do whatever is necessary to end the recession" the man is a muppet. brownwatch 422 days.
Complain about this comment
Personally what I find most disturbing is not Fred so much as all those people who allowed this to happen: government men, shareholders, the press, the public. Was it OK to be greedy and amoral before the melt down and not after? Is it Fred to be shot or rather all those close people who colluded? How close had you to be to Fred to be guilty?
Complain about this comment
Let's face it. When put into the context of the tax payers total liability for the public sector pension pot. Sir Fred's 20 odd million pales into insignificance.
Complain about this comment
Fred's Pension is indeed a bloomin' plant. Its strong and healthy roots are deeply embedded in the fertile loam of popular discontent. Who can tell what future mayhem its flowers may cause? Perhaps 'boredom' alone will
not be the death of this Triffid.
Complain about this comment
RBS pension fund was underfunded i.e. it cannot afford to pay Fred Goodwin's pension or the pensions of the other high paid bankers at RBS. The reason it is underfunded is that it invested too much in RBS stock. Duhhhh! I thought these guys were supposed to be smart and might have thought about correlated risks.
But because RBS is not insolvent and the UK bail-out is through stock purchase RBS can divert £800M of bailout money to their pension fund. Probably even have a legal obligation to do so. It is totally sick. We are completely insane to let guys that caused a £24Bn loss walk away with far more money than normal prudent businessmen in the real economy could ever make.
Complain about this comment
When I become prime minister (unlikely I know, because it is not a position I am seeking) one of the first things I would do would be to make it illegal for anyone in a salaried fulltime job to be paid more than 95% of the PM's salary. Part time jobs (directorships etc) would be set pro-rata.
As #72 says: "...it does appear rather strange that anyone can bring a company to its knees, and still walk away with a protected pension scheme." Taking this a stage further, I would say it is rather strange that anyone can bring a COUNTRY to its knees...
Nobody can claim that any other individual managing director or chief executive has more potential for doing catastrophic damage than the PM, so this approach would be fully justified.
This would have two effects:
1) It would prevent the ridiculous salaries that people at the top of both the private and public sectors currently get - nobody is worth that much and it is absolutely clear from the current situation that paying a lot has not ensured that the people in those posts are competant.
2) It would hopefully attract a wider choice of people to the position of prime minister, so if there are competant people out there, one of them might get it.
Complain about this comment
Lets MOVE ON!
HE did a deal that’s it deal done.
WHY on earth would he give a penny back?
Good riddance to bad rubbish.
Dock the pensions of those who allowed him to have the pension.
Maybe that would make others think twice about decisions made in these cases in future.
THE HORSE has well and truly BOLTED
Complain about this comment
Abandon it Robert.Leave this one to the Public Inquiry that will drag through all of this government incompetence. Please focus on what now matters to recovery. Where are the Lending Panel / Government figures on credit supply shortfalls. The Council of Mortgage lenders are making the same point :
Michael Coogan, director general of the CML, says: "January and February are usually the quietest months in the mortgage market. The current withdrawal of many specialist, small and foreign lenders from new lending has created a huge gap in the capacity to fund mortgages to match consumer demand and this is continuing in 2009.
"People want to know why lenders are not lending. They are, but government schemes to restore the flow of funds are primarily focused on a few large banks and recent lending commitments by a few lenders cannot fill the gap overnight although we hope to see more funds flowing into mortgage activity later in the year.
Turn your attention here, please..........
Complain about this comment
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article3456304.ece
This article was from just over a year go. I wonder if Fred knew what a shocking deal it was then?
Complain about this comment
Sir Shred's pension is immaterial, so is the outpourings of the G20. Why don't we just write off the mortgage debts of those affected - quicker and simpler and restart a much simpler economic model. As it stands we are going to reshuffle the toxic debts - the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. As for me - I go under in about two months. What a future for the kids....
Complain about this comment
OK, so he can keep the pension. Instead of cash, can he be paid with those £2.50 shares he sold to millions of duped investors. At least then, he can suffer the huge financial losses, the same as all of us.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
If Greedy Fred insists on his pension, there appears to be no particular rule as to how or where he should be paid.
I think we should make it available for him to collect PERSONALLY, EVERY WEEK, from a bank branch of his choice in Lerwick, and since £1 coins are legal tender, his approximately £10,000 a week should be handed over to him in bags.
I reckon this would weigh about a hundredweight.
Me, vindictive and spiteful?
Of course.
Complain about this comment
Let's move on from the pension fiasco. Let's move on from the banging drums of GB and HH when they said "No rewards for failure" and "The pension settlement is not acceptable therefore is not accepted". Let's move on from the government's docile acceptance of bankers still receiving their bonuses. Let's move on from the inaccurate "No more boom and bust". Let's move on from the 10p tax fiasco. Let's move on from the absurd and shady MPs expenses claims. Let's move on from who was responsible for not spotting the house price bubble. Let's move on from the drum banging of the G20 meeting. And can we please move on from GB putting the word "global" in front of every problem.
And if we move on from all that we see that 2p went on the price of a litre of fuel, very quietly.
So can't we move on just a bit quicker, fast forward perhaps, to the next general election...
Complain about this comment
89. andyhsufc
Well researched! WHAT an interesting read!
Even taking into consideration that we read it with the benefit of hindsight, it does rather suggest that there was some amount of waffle going on in some of the statement released to the press at the time.
And if he didn't know, the real question was, why didn't he know?
(As the Audit Commission and others like to ask various public servants as soon as they've replied, "I don't know" to a question .... "How can you manage what you don't know?")
Complain about this comment
63. l1vw1th1t
Very well put.
Though I do empathise with public feeling that Sir F (and others), when all things are said and done, were hugely rewarded for a significant paucity of performance.
Beyond that, yes, it's the old "people in glass houses" thing really.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
94 You are absolutely correct however the Government does not want to focus on what you think is important.
Until such time as the voters in the UK realise and accept that the last 11 years of Zanulabour has been an unmitigated disaster we can never move on. You can't fix the problem until you accept what the problem is.
Just accept that everything that Gordon Brown has done in the last 11 years has been wrong, we can then start sorting out the problem. The man and the party have been an unmitigated disaster for the UK.
The IMF will be here soon with some clear lessons for the country. Listen to the interview on Channel 4 news with the former head of the IMF, Simon Johnson, he doesn't wrap it up. http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1184614595?bctid=18399539001
Start listening at 19 minutes for the truth about Gordon Brown's economic policy then the spin of Mandelson.
Complain about this comment
The answer to this problem is very simple. RBS simply refuses to pay the pension and if Sir Fred really thinks he has a cast iron Contract then HE has to take legal action against RBS to force payment. If nothing else this will confirm a legal precedent. Very simple - don't pay !!
Complain about this comment
The Sir Fred saga is a bit boring but you are quite right, Robert, not to let it drop lest it becomes forgotten. The fact that Sir Fred isn't inclined to pay back ALL of his ill-gotten gains, despite public opinion, is a measure of the man's character and I wouldn't like to see him retaining his huge income AND being allowed to fade into obscurity. So keep up the good work Robert.
Complain about this comment
#93 - It's a condition of RBS pensions that they have to be paid into an RBS group account.
Keep on yearning you needy person, you!
Complain about this comment
Surely this whole matter can be settled by a windfall tax. Shall we say 110% of any lump sum paid over £25,000? This stratagem has been used by this administration to tax energy companies. I seem to remember that the tax receipts were spent on education. This time the tax money can be spent helping newly unemployed. This condition will ensure that long term "unemployed" do not get any of the windfall.
Complain about this comment
lets face it, theres a lot of people out there earning big money for no real effort, so i would say there is nobody on here can say they wouldnt have done exactly the same as fred goodwin,people in this country are overpaid, we are all to blame.were are greedy and selfish fred goodwin is a function of this.
Complain about this comment
"Will we be able to apply the same conditions to those working for the FSA and the current government incumbents?
The pension is entirely the fault of Brown, Darling, and Myners. Please hold them accountable. This horse has well and truly bolted, and the stable, paddock, and county are empty (lawfully)"
I agree with the earlier poster...
Complain about this comment
Why not sack Fred Goodwin for incompetence - afterall, the RBS has made a collossal loss with him at the helm? No pension at all then, legal obligations being null and void. Ordinary people are probably sacked for much more minor errors.
Complain about this comment
# 80 wasowenright
Nor so much unable as just too complacent I think! And have we lost the right to hold ALL of our investments or is a 95% loss enough? Actually, I'd venture that what's happened since bears some similarity to your scenario, if we were to stretch a point and say that all taxpayers are now effectively depositors!
Although I'd be very unhappy with the idea of wholesale confiscation of external capital to create a co-operative, it could certainly warrant consideration in cases similar to those we've seen recently.
Complain about this comment
A sobering thought for Sir Freed the Greed- when he dies he will take none of it with him!
Complain about this comment
Most of us deplore the Sir Fred situation. However, everyone on a company pension should beware any move to change the law to grab back some of his pension; its a precedent which could mean Fred today, us tomorrow. braveEddison is right, a contract is a contract.
Complain about this comment
Are none of you bored with this yet?
Is it not time to find something/somebody else to go on about?
Complain about this comment
Robert,
With the Chinese money now shoring up the IMF, I wondered if you'd fathomed why the British Government is not spinning that it does not have the same stigma to go to the IMF for an emergency loan?
Will there now be an unseemly "handbags at dawn" as Britain and the US "fight" for the funding to shore up their unbalanced budgets?
Complain about this comment
#110 StrongholdBarricades
"Will there now be an unseemly "handbags at dawn" as Britain and the US "fight" for the funding to shore up their unbalanced budgets?"
If there is, then Michelle has a significant physical advantage over Sarah.
Complain about this comment
POLICE CAMERA ACTION, COURT, GUILTY? PRISON, ASSET CONFISCATION.
LETS DO IT NOW!
FORM A QUEUE PLEASE!!
Complain about this comment
I have yet to see or hear it reported by the BBC that one of the changes that Goodwin brought in was to raise the age at which pensions could be paid to his staff by five years. For some reason, this doesn't seen to apply to him - can anyone explain how he managed to exempt himself from his own rules?
Complain about this comment
195 Starfinfin is absolutely correct about Goodwin being sacked but he is months behind the times. The occasion to do that was the weekend when all the evil deeds were sorted but the Govt obviously told RBS to get rid of him double quick time. So the pension deal was done while Goodwin accepted other contractual rights would be set aside. The alternative was for RBS to cite gross imcompetence and follow proper employment law principles. Except the Govt wanted it done quickly. So GB was to blame but you won't get him to admit it - much too good a story to spin and divert attention from Govt gross incompetence. Incidentally I think RBS would have had to prove fraud or some other criminal fault to have taken Goodwin's pension and that would have embroiled GB and his Govt's favourite banker in a major political war. So no chance.
Complain about this comment
I am amazed I am now beginning to feel sorry for Fred Goodwin (although not for Mike Ashley) although I do think that he could make the lives of others and at the same time his own life better. I think a lot of people, including me, need to get a grip on what is truly important. At present FG seems to have become public enemy number one, but this in a society where people have murdered or connived in the murder of their children, in the murder of entirely innocent/unconnected individuals, and a society where numerous people routinely suffer serious unkindness and hurt.
FG is guilty of poor decisions (He did not make poor decisions intentionally –he did not set out to end up where he is now – he did not acquire ABN AMRO with a view to screwing up the RBS and his career. I understand the Chairman of another big bank as the under-bidder could have ended up filling the role now occupied by FG, and no doubt lots of others, who are now keeping their heads down, were cheering him on when he made the fateful calls). He is now undoubtedly guilty of greed, a selfish concern for wealth beyond what any human being reasonably could need, but even in condemning him for that we all risk being guilty of elevating the importance of money/wealth to a much higher status than it deserves. Sure, people lost money (some lost a lot) but I am sorry, it says on the tin, that the value of shares can go down as well as up. Taxpayers can feel aggrieved, but some money is always wasted (hands up, unless you are a Liberal-Democrat who thinks you live in a world as you would like it to be, if you don’t think that the Government will always have to bail out a lot of failed enterprises/activities for a whole variety of plausible reasons) but we are citizens, we get a vote, we get to take part, we actually do get the politicians we deserve (that is a govt. lots of people, maybe not us, but lots of our fellow citizens, voted for), and it is a good deal better living in the UK than in a whole variety of other places – lets face it we have plenty of options to move abroad but most of us don’t.
Nevertheless, in the world of the internet and revenge seeking crazies, if he has any sense FG should try to atone for the bad decisions he made, to become, as far as it is possible, someone regarded as having tried to atone. The relevant model is surely Profumo. Reviled for the crime of sexual indiscretions with consenting adults who also had liaisons with high ranking officers of an enemy power, but by all accounts tried hard for the remainder of his life to atone and gained enormous respect of his peers (probably better for you than having a fat pile of cash and living with a bunch of the brain dead in a tax haven (if they still exist)). Profumo’s indiscretion was also within the context of a really serious problem, the Cold War. Now is just an economic downturn- people still want more stuff, people have skills/education, capital will become available, prices will adjust, the downturn will end.
Complain about this comment
One should always remember the effect of great literature.
I confidently expect to be hailed from an upstairs casement by Sir Fred (recently visited by some ghosts) to go round to the neighbouring street and buy that enormous goose, and asked to deliver it to Bob Cratchit's house.
Complain about this comment
Ref No.2
Morally or immorally, only within the Mafia areunbreakable contracts made.
Complain about this comment
This saga must be near to the final score now.
Sir Fred keeps his pension.
Ministers keep their jobs.
Accountants/Solicitors get paid for their services in trying to recover Sir Fred's pension.
Taxpayers STUFFED again.
Why do we bother?????
Robert When its full time be so kind as to print the final cost of this mess and by the way the FSA still have my savings frozen.
Complain about this comment
Peston said: This waiver from HMRC was necessary, for the obvious reason that neither Royal Bank or Sir Fred wanted to face a stonking tax bill on a lump sum he had given back.
Duncan replies: Dear Mr Peston, when you are helping your children with their homework, I hope you would correct the above sentence were they so ill informed as to write it. I am sure you will make them change it to:
This waiver from HMRC was necessary, for the obvious reason that neither Royal Bank NOR Sir Fred wanted to face a stonking tax bill on a lump sum he had given back.
I know many reporters and presenters at the BBC are wont to follow some ill advised trend and change syntax, grammar and pronunciation; but I think you shouldn't be one of those sheep Mr Peston, award winning journalist that you are, latter day Mr Darcy that you are reported to be!
Duncan
Complain about this comment
#114. distressedone Your analysis is spot on.
For those calling for the FSA to set rules on bankers compensation - do you really think this will solve the problem when the FSA will undoubtable turn to the same consultants that will have endorsed the original proposals to the compensation committees that approved the arrangements in the first place?
The compensation committees have an incentive to approve these awards as they raise the average package for directors in the sector, so they in their turn are benfitted when the averages are used to determine their own pay awards. The only way I can see in which this issue can be dealt with is to have the compenation committees to have share holders represented and holdingthe balance of power within the committee. Or to have let the banks that were technically insolvent fail.I do not see why Sir fred could not have been sacked his primary responsibility is to the share holders and by allowing the bank to fail ( become insolvent) he failed in his primary duty as CEO. However, that didn't happen but when will GB and Harriet hHarman be quizzed over their statements aimed to deflect critisism from the Government to the bankers.
Complain about this comment
Robert,
I see Darling is "managing expectations", and coming around to the IMF viewpoint expressed sometime ago.
Are the Treasury really so far behind or the curve or did they believe that bravado would be sufficient to get them through the crisis? Or is agreeing with the IMF a necessary first step?
Either way I believe that economic competency has gone, much like the empty stable of Sir Fred's pension
Whilst I wouldn't wish the DC phrase of "next stop IMF" to be proved accurate, I would like an assessment of what is actually happening. A pooling of all that research talent which your contacts might be willing to share with you...the bond market for the debt, the share market for the pension companies, the currency speculators for inflation and profitability
Then, maybe a nice interview with someone from the government about what is going to be cut by this government to make sure that after the next election the new mandate people don't have to slash much further.
Maybe hold someone to a definite answer to the question you ask? I won't hold my breath
Complain about this comment
I'm sorry.
These bankers are paid to look after the interests of their customers, using money which is provided by their government under trust
They are not paid to use the money or the trust for the advantage of their shareholders or themselves to the detriment of others.
None of the bankers should receive any bonuses; indeed there is a good case for seeking penalties for their malfeasance.
The fact that they claim ignorance, or that the regulators were incompetent is no excuse.
Complain about this comment
Dearest Sir Fred: I have suffered greatly though the recession - don't worry you will not be held to blame, if you give me some money to tide me over, and all will be forgiven (from me anyway - just leaves another 64 million people to join me in forgiving you)
Be nice and charitable (though don't know whether you know what either of those words mean) Thanks in advance. ever hopeful and optimistic
Complain about this comment
hodgeey (#122) "These bankers are paid to look after the interests of their customers, using money which is provided by their government under trust"
But who comprises these customers? Who were the big borrowers? What were the big loans for? Why is the press not looking into who and what fuelled the commercial property (including Buy-To-Let) boom, and all the borrowing to speculate on the highly volatile financial markets etc? Why the assumption it was just small loans for dwellings and the odd car? Have you seen everyone putting up For Sale signs? No! Why not does the press not focus upon the major PPP/PFI projects which the Private Sector was so eager to buy into where a 10m BFS investment might produce a 50m return? Who pays their salaries and commissions their work? Where were all the loans coming from for the big profitable projects?
Why is nobody in the mainstream media asking about that? ;-)
Most people are being distracted I suggest.
Complain about this comment
The Board, or the RemCom of RBS approved changing Fred's (no Sir from me)pensionable age from 60 to 50 which cost their shareholders a few million quid. I have yet to see the reasoned explanation of how this resolution was in the RBS shareholders' interests.
If a post office manager gave away a few thousand quid of the post office's money - he would go to jail.
If some directors got prosecuted (with a jury of 12 good folks and 90% at the AGM carries it for me!) for this type of behaviour, it would go a long way to improving corporate governance. We need the UK equivalent of "wire fraud" so that criminal prosecution can happen in this type of situation.
Complain about this comment
Dumb down the population (via education x 3 and immigration) and it's much easier to take advantage of their trust (and incomes) I suggest...
With light-touch (minimal state) government from all three parties, who is there to protect them?
Complain about this comment
I am sick and tired of this government treating the general public like idiots and ..aparently getting away with it.
Alistair darling today comes accross all humble.. he and his economists made a mistake...erm it is worse than feared...no recovery this year....sorry.
The overwhelming consensus of opinion here , on this blog knew that last year, It was obvious..as plain as the nose on your face economically, how come they did not?
either
a) They are totally incompetant and should be sacked
or
b) They did know but the truth was politically unacceptable so they manipulated it to save their scrawny necks and expense accounts...and should be sacked.
I am starting to hope that this recession is really really really bad, it will be the only way the people will tear themselves away from their Sky TV and broadband internet and flush this lot out, down the U bend..where they undoubtably belong.
Complain about this comment
"And for those of you bored witless by this saga (and I know there are lots of you who are in this category), I will endeavour to return to it only if something of genuine moment were to occur (and I honestly can't think what that would be)"
Robert, you are sounding us out to see if we have reached saturation point on this story. For me, No.
This fiasco has become a sort of benchmark for the recession within the UK. Now, all this talk of "New World Order" by GBrown is supposed to make us think that the Goodwin days are over and he is effectively telling us to move on.
This issue has to be kept in the forefront of the news and we cannot let it go. The "goverment" and Sir Fred have to be brought to justice. Without justice this country will never recover from this recession.
Define Justice: the quality of being just or fair
Complain about this comment
#127. Jericoa wrote:
"I am starting to hope that this recession is really really really bad, it will be the only way the people will tear themselves away from their Sky TV and broadband internet and flush this lot out, down the U bend..where they undoubtably belong."
Starting to hope?
There are many contributors to this blog who seem to be wishing that this recession is long, deep and very painful just to give the government a bloody nose and say "I told you so". And yet, at the same time, they pretend to be concerned for all those who are losing their businesses, their jobs and their homes. The hypocrisy is sickening.
Whatever our political allegiances (and I certainly will not be voting Labour) we should all be hoping for - and doing everything we can to ensure - a quick recovery. And then let the people deliver their verdict in the general election that has to happen sometime in 2010.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
everyone seemsto want to blame someone but no one blames the right one all this started in 1979 when the british public elected a tory governemt which systematicly set out to destroy the UK's manufacturing base stripping this county of real jobs.
Since then its only been a matter of time and with effectivley 28 years of right wing governments here in the uk the pendulum which normally keeps the uk economy balanced never swung back to the left this county needs a left wing government now more than ever, one which puts people and the creation of real jobs at its heart.
Complain about this comment
#129 rbs-temp
Not wishing this depression to be long, just know that
it will be.
And as for 2010 - possibility it may be May, or not,
depending on whether he 'bottle's it' again.
Complain about this comment
Oh look - short lines!
Complain about this comment
#129 rbs_temp
I don't agree.
What I take from several of the regular contributors is more a sense of 'we'd be happy for the recession to be almost totally insignificant, but we don't believe it's going to be'.
Add to that a dollop of "to be forewarned is to be forearmed".
Perhaps people need to consider just how long does it have to be how bad before you, personally, and those near and dear to you, are in seriously deep doo-dahs.
It's rather like unemployment. Being out of a job for a couple of weeks, or maybe a couple of months is one thing, but being unemployed for a year or two is usually a deeply unpleasant experience. If that runs in parallel with house repossession and/or business failure and/or relationship break-down, then your talking major traumatic experience.
Of course, their will always be the few who will blow their trumpets either for or against this or that political party. In the main, I think most people rather ignore those, except when they happen to make an apposite or humourous point in the midst of their politicised tirades.
And perhaps another approach - rather than hoping for a short-lived recession - is to look at ways to survive it, whether it turns out to be long or short.
Finally, lets be clear on one thing, even if the recession is short-lived, the varying forms of fall-out of it will be around for a long, long time.
Complain about this comment
#132. Japanbytes wrote:
"Not wishing this depression to be long, just know that
it will be."
No, Japanbytes, you do not *know* that the recession will be long. No-one knows how long it will last.
The depth of the recession has taken almost every economic commentator in almost every country by surprise. And it quite possible that the speed of the recovery will take everyone by surprise too. I'm not saying it will - but no-one knows.
Complain about this comment
All of those millions might have small appeal to a man who seems destined to live out his remaining years as a recluse.
Complain about this comment
The easiest way to deal with it is:
a) Give him his pension pot.
b) Introduce a new currency, 1 new pound = 1,000,000 old pounds.
c) Let everybody transfer except Fred.
I don't begrudge him a pot of £16 pounds. That's about the right rate for the work he did.
Complain about this comment
so the forecasts Darling made last November were "too optimistic"..... how is it that every journalist, blogger, commentator and even my 87 year old mother, knew the forecasts were wrong. Everyone except the government? Either Darling/Brown are totally stupid or....they are making political decisions and not economic ones, either way they should be sacked... i expect we will get the same phoney forecasts in the budget, dont fall for it! come on the BBC journalists do your job and hold these charlatans to account...
Complain about this comment
RBS temp
I like sparring with you, you are in a minority here but you keep coming back for more!
I have no desire to see people suffer,you seek to turn the passion I feel about the injustice of the situation against me by using my words outside of the context of my motivations. This is not about egos or giving the political elite 'a bloody nose' that is the playground stuff they engage in, it is not where I am coming from.
For me the best outcome is that there is some kind of recovery ...probably early 2010 for us is the best we can realistically hope for.
I even thought that when Alaister first announced we would be recovering in July..so I must be some kind of untold economic genius....such that the economists who serve politicians 'missed that'.
Recovery will be from a very low base and very slow particularly in this country as we dont have much manufacturing and we are no longer self sufficient in oil or energy in general and we have huge debt and bloated government.
Financial services, such as they were will not generate the past tax revenues anymore, there will have to be unprecedented cuts in public services. Hopefully they will cut the quangos, champions of street football and other excesses first. On that basis there would be more justice in labour winning the next election actually so they would be forced to sort out their own mess....Vote labour I say!!!
The east will recover much more quickly than the west, they have huge surpluses, most of the manufacturing and have been busily buying up most of the commodities with those surpluses in the last few years.
That is the best we can hope for......we become a tourist destination for rich tourists and bumble along with nothing much to sell,huge debts to service and a greatly depleted standard of living.
You got one thing right though I am very angry with the incumbents and I am frustrated that nobody seems to do anything about it. Here is a small section of the roll of honour...
cash for questions
Cash for honours
Lords for hire for law changes
legality of the Iraq war
the 45 minute claim
Dr David Kelly
Alaister darlings predictions about the economy.
Lord myners honesty in handling RBS pensions
jaqui smiths expenses (twice)
Mcnulties expenses
Advertising for smoking on formula one, the mysterious case of the U turn following a donation to labour by bernie ecclestone.
Imprisonment without trial..how did they get that vote through again?
Complicity in CIA torture flights
Selling the UKs gold at rock bottom prices
selling our infrastructure to offshore tax havens via PFI
The appointment of the ex boss of HBOS as deputy head of the FSA!!!
as barrie singleton says on PM's blog
''politicians, in the limiting case, seek power, money or both, and will sacrifice integrity to those ends.''
Why wouldn't I be angry? Why wouldn't I be passionate about it? why wouldent I be exasperated by it ?
Jericoa
Complain about this comment
I am not bored with this story - those who are are playing into the hands of those who would rather this story, and the outcry over the negligence of bankers would all conveniently go away. We've lost you all £200+ billion, whilst rewarding ourselves handsomely, now shut up and go away.
I'm sure Hampton would love this and other stories (amounting to the public flogging) to go away as RBS is facing many lawsuits over the negligence of RBS in misrepresenting its position to shareholders.
Whilst major UK fund managers apparently are willing to toe the Government's line (to our detriment as it's largely our pensions and not their money), small shareholders, local authority pension funds and US investors are not.
I for one would like to see the directors of RBS, Lloyds, HBOS, BB etc all pursued in the courts for their actions. If they are not, directors of PLC's will continue to remain largely unaccountable for their actions whilst paying themselves huge remuneration, to the detriment of our pension funds.
I am also intrigued by Hampton's connections to Labour - he was Chairman of Sainsburys prior to the short-lived UKFI role before RBS-clearly Lord Sainsbury is very well connected to Labour.
He did not cover himself in glory when he was FD of Lloyds - witness the share price decline in his time there, and I suspect was asked to go, so what are his credentials for this very important role?
Let's hope he's not yet another Labour muppet, and he's not another Blank.
Complain about this comment
As a result of his greed he and his family are now living in fear.
Complain about this comment
Harroet Harperson's big words ring more hollow by the day. What a fool she made of herself with that interview.
Complain about this comment
#139. Jericoa wrote:
"I have no desire to see people suffer,you seek to turn the passion I feel about the injustice of the situation against me by using my words outside of the context of my motivations."
But you said in a previous post that you are starting to hope that the recession is "really, really, really bad". How do you measure the severity of a recession if not by the misery that it causes to real people? How can a recession be really bad without causing suffering?
You have every right to be very, very angry with this government, for all the reasons you state and more; I would not disagree with you on any of those issues. But most of them would apply to all political parties - it is our politicians that are corrupt and untrustworthy, not merely Labour politicians. Why do you think the Tories are not making more noise about the recent revelations about the scandalous abuse of expenses?
Labour came to power promising to be whiter than white and turned out to be as greedy and corrupt as the party that preceded them. Voting them out may give them a much-deserved bloody nose, but who exactly do we vote for?
Complain about this comment
#124 JadedJean
By customers I meant lenders not borrowers. Silly me!
Complain about this comment
#143 rbs_temp
"who exactly do we vote for?"
Your question reflects the core problem of parliamentary democracy (especially in the English concept of Parliamentary Sovereignty). Our only role is to cast a vote every 4/5 years for a candidate representing one of the manifestos on offer, then turning supreme power over to the leaders of the party that happens to get most MPs.
I'm increasingly in favour of Scotland (other parts of the UK can do as they like) adopting a Swiss style "direct democracy", in which the people can call a referendum "Any federal law, certain other federal resolutions, and international treaties that are either perpetual and irredeemable, joinings of an international organization, or that change Swiss law may be subject to a facultative referendum if at least 50,000 people or eight cantons have petitioned to do so within 100 days." (Wiki)
Complain about this comment
Yes Fred's pension is an important issue - but one that can be sorted out later. Any banker, regulator and politician found to have feathered there own nest at the expense of the rest of us should be pursued in the courts in due course. The call for physical violence against those perceived to be responsible for our current woes is a path to anarchy.
whilst it is natural to look for a scapegoat it is surely more important to look for a way out of the mess. Until we tackle the excessive debt, government and personal, in the UK and the unrealistic size of Government, national and local, no sustainable recovery will be possible
Complain about this comment
#143
I think you answer your own question, I agree with you that they are all the same. I was trying to convey the feeling that we need a 'sea change' probably outside of the incumbent political spectrum, trouble is I can not see that happening realistically, people can be placated and distracted too easily in the age of technology and mass communication.
In order for a sea change to happen the recession would need to be absolutely terrible, my dread of that is only matched by my dread of carrying on the way we are.
Caught between a rock and a hard place...
jericoa
Complain about this comment
#145. oldnat wrote:
"I'm increasingly in favour of Scotland (other parts of the UK can do as they like) adopting a Swiss style "direct democracy", in which the people can call a referendum..."
I disagree strongly. Referenda are not the way forward, for public opinion is fickle, easily swayed and generally works against the rights of minorities. If the wishes of the British public were to be passed into law then we'd have public hangings, castration of paedophiles, repatriation of immigrants, immediate withdrawal from the EU and the outlawing of civil ceremonies for same-sex partners. I do not want my country governed on an agenda decided by the tabloids.
Representative parliamentary democracy, with law-making firmly in the hands of intelligent, mature individuals, is the correct means of government, but we desperately need a system in which every vote generally counts. In our current system, only one vote in 10 (or fewer) actually affects the outcome of a general election.
But no form of government would have averted the current economic problems, which are almost entirely due to reckless behaviour on the part of banks and consumers.
Complain about this comment
For those that think the prospect of some kind of recovery in GDP? occurring in the UK economy within the next year or so, ask yourselves Recovery to what? - How things were before Gordon's crash?
Are we expected to think that some sort of economic recovery will mean that Goodwin's pension fisco can be conveniently forgotten while he basks under non dom. tax haven sun?
Things have changed - I think we all have problem dealing with this. Recovery to how things were before Gordon's crash means more boom and bust. Goondog Trillionaire Brown and all the richest nations obviously want a recovery to how things were 'before' because that is what we got used to and our economy and financial market is still geared to this historic mindset. But, I think that this is a mistake as we will all have to borrow less, save more and consume less going forward. This is already means that the poorest in society will become very poor going forward.
Goodwin's pension is the ugliest statue on the unclimbable hill that leaves a shadow over Goondog's governmental tower of borrowings.
We haven't adjusted yet, in fact, we haven't even started. We're also going into a dangerous volatile shaky period where some regions/sectors of the economy will grind to a halt and others will race ahead. Deflation/inflation/ stagflation/ energy/fuel shortages are just around the corner. The result - a kaleidescope complex economy with hot spots and extreme cold spots that the Bank of England cannot handle (even if M King is left to get on with without interference) without a new remit and powers. Some countries will go boom and others will go bust. Do you think e.g. North Korea, Russia or Iran are the slighest bit bothered if they operate new tax havens and other devices to gain a global advantage going forward?
Gordon needs to steady his eye along the new playing field and realise that it is virtual and in the UK it distorts with the finacial black hole he's created. G20 has not and will never create a level global financial playing field for the UK because the UK economy and its finances are already far too messed up and need major internal structual improvement - not just gambling with expensive and ill placed financial stimuli.
A 'recovery' to how things used to be is not going to happen - we now have early 1980's style 'structural change' - we're going to have to develop different ideas and values just to survive and not just to recreate a New labour style credit boom fiasco.
Goodwin has already made his mark on history and the damage is done, whatever happens with the infamous pension. Let's not wash over this too quickly - this is a milestone in unchartered terretory.
UK tax strategy must now be bold like never seen before as is the main economic tool at our disposal because interest rate cuts and billions down the bank plug hole have brought little or no improvement. The problem is that Brown's government will 'horse whip' the ordinary middle range tax payer person at the next budget - partly because of all those skeletons rattling in the cupboard.
Complain about this comment
#145
sounds like a great idea and quite easy to do with modern technology..what chances of getting that kind of genuine people led democracy through here?
Would be good to put on a manifesto..lib dems perhaps may entertain it.
I would vote for a party offering constitutional change, we need it, the spivs have learnt the system, learnt to manipulate it for personal profit rather than the greater good. So we need to change the system. I am all for doing that using the existing democratic aparatus.
Can someone put something similar to post 145 on your manifesto please...
jericoa
Complain about this comment
Good for Sir Fred! If we as a society are pathetic enough to let executive get away with such individual plundering of corporate assets, we deserve to foot the bill. After decades of deregulation, pitifully low top tax rates and golden this-that-and-the-other for those who presided over today's mess, we've no right to complain when somebody takes advantage of the system voters acquiesced in so long as they saw their house price skyrocketing beyond the reach of poorer compatriots. There's a bit of Sir Fred in all of us, so wish him luck instead of griping that he actually did what millions voted to allow.
Complain about this comment
143 rbs temp
Policeman stops speeding motorist on a busy motorway. Driver says - Why did you stop me, everybody is going at the same speed. Policeman says - I can only stop you one at a time sir. Driver goes to court and gets fine and suffers penalty.
Do you understand now. It is getting caught and doing the deed. You keep raising this point about how others would have acted and it is meaningless. It is on par with blaming Thatcher which is another popular post from others. This is Browns fantasy we are paying for. 'I have a dream', only its a nightmare.
Have you ever had your means of earning an income removed? Of course not, you are clearly too comfortable. Do you, even at this stage understand the mechanisms that are being placed on probably a million people - honestly engaged in a longterm undertakings and working hard and suddenly having to resolve matters in a very short term, a term so short that they would never be give the long term liabities under them.
How do you think you would cope if your account was frozen? Computer says No. Savings - they dont last long, do the sums. Hmm OAPs need more to live on than a family on benefits by statute, thats odd. How does that work then. Please tell me. Not that I am denying OAPs their need, or their supporters who advise they are having problems. Just tell me how the families manage, be statute. Or do you think that poverty has no impact on developing a kids potential. If so you are very much in a minority.
It is irrelevant what another political party would have done. It is the party in charge that are responsible. As and when another party is in charge they will also be responsible in turn. The straighforward fact is that this mess was forecast to one extent or another and plenty of people did try to warn it was on the away.
Whilst there may be a 'recovery' in the future some caught up in this will never recover.
PS My guess is your ex boss Golden Shred could be off getting plastic surgery, possible even a sex change. I would not like to be in his shoes, high heeled or otherwise.
PPS I am not associated with GB, NuLab or RBS etc in anyway. Or any political party come to that. As far as I am concerned Brown had one job which even he recognised at the start, and that was too mitigate, not eliminate, mitigate, as far as possible the damage of economic cyclic downturn. He is a dismal failure and will be noted as such in history. A monkey could have done a better job.
Complain about this comment
#148
bit of an over -reaction castration..public hangings !!
last time I checked those things do not seem to happen in switzerland.
You seem to be using the same sensationalist tactics to push your agenda as the tabliod newspapers you critisise in the same post lol.
# 149
Yes you understand where we are and what is happening, what I dont understand is why the media do not? If they do they are deliberatley repressing that point of view, the people need to know what is happening for real so that we can put pressure on the incumbents and have a genuine agenda for change at the next election.
Maybe the lib dems are the only vaguely viable alternative, trouble is their leader is hardly the stuff of inspiration and they have a few jokers in the pack also (Mr Oughton and the like) so many people will not vote for them even if they do put together a manifesto with constitutional change in it.....pity. If they had a real talented and charismatic front man they would have agood chance of stealing the show next year.
Complain about this comment
#148 rbs_temp
I don't know where you live, but unless it's in Scotland I'm making no suggestions as to how you run your affairs.
Funnily enough, when I was last in Switzerland, I noticed no "public hangings" or "castration of paedophiles". Perhaps because Switzerland subscribes to the UN Convention on Human Rights, and any such proposal in a referendum would not be valid unless it was preceded by an earlier referendum to remove the Convention on Human Rights from their constitution. The Swiss are not silly people - their much quoted slowness to give votes to women preceded the adoption of the Human Rights Convention. It couldn't happen now.
When I first started looking at the idea of direct democracy, my initial reaction was similar to yours. However, when you look at the actuality, it is different. In practice, few "popular" referenda actually become law. Parliament looks at the motion and proposes an amendment. They are forced by public opinion to examine an issue, but their amendment normally passes.
I understand that the English/British (forgive me if you are neither) have a view that their constitution is the best that has been, or ever will be (as Lord Braxfield commented). However, a less insular approach which examines the reality of direct democracy might suit you better.
Alternatively, stick with what you have, and spend your time in inveterate whining about your politicians after you have given monarchical power to the leader of the party that happens to gain most MPs.
Complain about this comment
With regard to Sir Fred Goodwin's pension which at least will be £555.000 and his cash pay out of £2.7m as far as I am concerned he is just greedy and I say he should pay back to those who have banked with his bank and who have lost out because of Bank Managers like him who have been so greedy that they have caused our present financial crisis. He is all right but has he any conscience for causing so many to struggle financially. I say no he is too selfish and greedy. I think it is absolutely disgusting and disgracefull.
J. Cox
Birmingham
Complain about this comment
148 rbs temp
''But no form of government would have averted the current economic problems, which are almost entirely due to reckless behaviour on the part of banks and consumers.''
I dont want to have a go at you but this simply is not correct. It is the mission of business to develop monopoly and exploit accordingly. This was stated in the early 1970s by the then CEO of the Courtauld Group, then a big player. It is the responsibility of government to regulate so that monopoly and excessive exploitation does not occur. This was also stated by the same CEO. You are correct with your embedded comment that business has self harmed in this matter but that does not mitigate the duty of governance which has been missing under Brown. Why else is there the sudden scramble for regulation. Business does not self regulate, it is not in its interest. I fail to give consumers much blame in this matter. They were sold false promises by all. Further it any contract is two way and it is the responsibility for both parties to check and verify the basis of the contract. The banks, some at least, failed in their responsibility. The banks have access to more data than the individual consumer and are in the more powerful position. Halifax expanded their share of the mortgage market by nearly 50 percent in the last year of independent operation.
''I disagree strongly. Referenda are not the way forward, for public opinion is fickle, easily swayed and generally works against the rights of minorities. If the wishes of the British public were to be passed into law then we'd have public hangings, castration of paedophiles, repatriation of immigrants, immediate withdrawal from the EU and the outlawing of civil ceremonies for same-sex partners. I do not want my country governed on an agenda decided by the tabloids.''
Digital democracy probably is the way forward. Your examples are emotive and minority views and not proven to be the majority. The issue is the discussion of actions within law not outside it. If politicans were honest and presented the facts - that for example EU immigrants have a right to be here under EU law, then half these issues would disappear. But politicans wish to posture that there is more room for action than is actually the case. Digital democracy would actually provide a more effective voice for minorities, it is more akin to Proportional Rep. If ethnic minorities did not feel so excluded and disenfranchised they would be less inclined to blow themselves up - it is the ultimate cry of listen to me. So I disagree profoundly.
But keep it up.
Complain about this comment
153. Jericoa
media = reinstatement is the name of the game.
Complain about this comment
#154 oldnat "I understand that the English/British (forgive me if you are neither) have a view that their constitution is the best that has been, or ever will be"
Come on oldnat - don't demonise us - or put words into the the mouths of ordinary people. The view you expressed in not one I hear at all. Ordinary English folk have been trying to improve our constitution since the days of Charles I. More recently, the Chartists were a pan-UK movement with very strong English roots. And in a referendum, I'm sure that the English would vote for electoral reform - it's the ruling politicians who don't want it and won't let us have the chance to choose.
As for referenda, perhaps nasty things would pass - then people would have to live with the consequences of their own decisions. It might make them think more careful next time. I would personally propose a referendum on media ownership to break-up the evil Murdoch empire too.
Back to the business of Shred's pension: respect for the rule of law depends upon justice being seen to be done. It's not just Goodwin: it the whole business elite, PLCs, pension funds and even building societies. The CEO of my own, the Yorkshire BS, also gets considerably more than the PM, and Chancellor, but for managing a considerably smaller outfit. Admittedly, they have no lie to bet, commercial or sub-prime exposure (so they say); but I cannot see the justification for it. They are not entrepreneurs.
To me, an entrepreneur is someone who risks their all to start up their own business, not someone who risks OUR all to create an empire from which they can walk away relatively unscathed if it all goes wrong.
Complain about this comment
To: Jericoa, glenafon, rbs_temp, oldnat, Sutara, JadedJean and alexandercurzon.
Why not get together with all those ideas and form a new political movement.
I'm sure you could, collectively, iron out your differences.
Add Somali_pirate_SP500, NewProtectorCromwell, WeeScamp and GRIMUPNORTH77 and you have the makings of an old days full size cabinet.
I'll be happy to act as Cabinet Secretary, subject, of course, to the usual remuneration and expenses package.
My people will be in touch!
Complain about this comment
#148 rbs_temp
"I do not want my country governed on an agenda decided by the tabloids."
Well, well. You do assume. If there was this referenda style of government here (meaning Scotland, as others can choose for themselves), there would become an appetite for knowledge of a much more palatable kind with more sensible and broader content than our current tabloid mush, encompassing more than just one journalist or editor's narrow views.
So the media would so evolve. It would have to or be left behind, as other forms of accessing this information would inevitably spring up/be made use of, and if, as they would undoubtedly in part be, these other available sources were credible, the tabloid papers would be shown for the pap they most certainly are.
You are forgetting the factor that the majority of us would not be satisfied, when our need arose for tabloids to do this (so that we could be comfortable enough to make an informed choice), by the offerings of these newspapers, especially when other outlets would be there stepping in ready to offer this to us, in light of the demand for it that there would then be.
I think you'll find that's what happens in Switzerland.
Complain about this comment
#157
So it would seem, does no harm to prod them in the ribs every now and again though, especially the BBC, we pay for them directly if they don't actively pursue a path free of commercial or party political self interest who will?
Alaister campbell helped by the rise of crony based litigation snipped their wings.
blog space is all that is left and they keep moderating out that which is too uncomfortable, like Robert pestons un-declared support for the rather shady Common purpose group.
Jericoa
Complain about this comment
rbs_temp: Jericoa doesn't want people to suffer I'm sure. Neither do I but, to me, the worst possible outcome of this crisis to me would be an apparent quick return to "business as usual", because I don't think it's workable or sustainable.
Complain about this comment
159. EBAHGUM
No Thanks. I believe it is individual action that is important.
Complain about this comment
#158 sashaclarkson
A typically well made point about the remuneration of the CEO of the Yorkshire BS.
His is a typical example of all the "if its good enough for them, it's good enough for me" thinking that flowed from the faulty banking model.
He's not the only culprit. Look at all financal institution exectutives. Not only at the very highest level. Levels two, three and four would bear closer examination.
Nonesensically high salaries for doing normal jobs within the abilities of anyone in possession of an "O" level mathematics qualification.
Complain about this comment
#158 sashaclarkson
I didn't intend to demonise. However, if "Ordinary English folk have been trying to improve our constitution since the days of Charles I" then I have to say that they have been spectacularly ineffective, and if the latest example you can give is the Chartist movement in the 1840s, then that is indicative.
It's also indicative that you say "it's the ruling politicians who don't want it and won't let us have the chance to choose." That was also true in Scotland when the UK state started to seriously interfere with Scottish domestic affairs in the late 20th century. We did something about it (many stopped voting for either of the 2 major UK parties - that was significant : "civic Scotland" set up our own Constitutional Convention without asking Westminster's permission).
If you continue to lie down and succumb to the politician's agenda, then you cannot claim to be doing anything to improve your constitution.
Complain about this comment
#148 rbs_temp
continued (sorry!)
I omitted to point out that, as far as I understand it, although the Swiss electorate can instigate referenda, it is much more usual that they merely veto perceived unjust laws than to come up with and instigate any new legislation.
Complain about this comment
#163 glenafon
Sorry to hear you're not willing to join the club but best wishes with your individual quest.
Complain about this comment
#159 EBAHGUM
Why on earth do you think I would want to join a new political movement for England?
The English are a grown-up people and can decide their own affairs (preferably without Scots Labour MPs getting in the way).
If they want to surrender their sovereignty to the Queen in Parliament that's entirely their affair. I may comment from outside about that insanity, but I wouldn't dream of interfering.
Complain about this comment
#148 rbs_temp
continued again!
I also meant to point out that it is often merely the threat of a referendum that makes governments already initiate a reform. Government can then in fact work faster not slower.
Complain about this comment
#158 sashaclarkson
"Ordinary English folk have been trying to improve our constitution since the days of Charles I."
Good grief, then you need some help!
It's easy, you come up with your own constitution and campaign hard for it's adoption (if you had Swiss style direct democracy...). I'd advise maybe basing it on The Scottish Declaration of Arbroath, the American Declaration of Independence or the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen. They're all quite good.
Complain about this comment
Mistakes can be forgiven, dishonour will never be forgotten.
Not many people were given a second chance to recover from a professional and personal calamity. The pension was a gift, nto a gift of money but a gift of honour.
On the day he was given the deal for the pension, Fred should have said he will give all, except £28000, of his annual pension to charity. He will continue to take only £28000 annual pension until UK's debt is reduced to less than 10% GDP. With what has received in salary and bonuses over the years, he and his family will never go hungry or lack essentials and comforts. Many people will be overjoyed to receive £28000 annual pension.
For those who don't know, read the story on John Perfumo. A few days after his disgrace, he started his 40 years of charity work by washing dishes, cleaning toilets and other manual work.
He was given a CBE and if I remember it right, he was seated next to the Queeen in a banquet.
It is probably too late for Fred now. I doubt we will see him and his family in the UK again. Politicians and bankers hope the public will soon forget. But when will the final straw of distrust put on the camel breaking its back? When will the ship stops moving because there are one too many hole?
The next event after this financial crisis will be unrecoverable.
Complain about this comment
Morning Robert,
thank you for another fascinating article on Fred BadLoss.
Ref #63 l1vw1th1t
You argue forcibly against retrospective legislation although there are precidents in windfall taxes. I would ask you to consider the following with respect to contracts:-
Company A agrees a remuneration contract (including pensions) with Employee B. Company A goes bankrupt, what then happens to the contract?
Surely it and its promises are null and void since the company can't pay its creditors. The pensioners who are looked after by the Government compensation scheme fall into this category with the maximum pension to be payed decided by Law (I think at 20,000 GBP per annum).
If this is a fair arrangement decided by the Honourable Members of the House then why does it not apply to RBS (and Northern Rock for that matter)?
I think that there is a good case for both of these banks' pension funds to be turned over to the Pensions Compensation scheme and administered by them.
Or were both banks not really bankrupt at all???
Complain about this comment
brown says "im to busy sorting out the economy to worry about election dates" yeah right ,to worried about getting wiped out at the election more like, do the country a favour brown , call a election then clear off for good. brownwatch 420 days.
Complain about this comment
and heres a message to the guy that questioned my gambling system last week, as regards betting on draws in the championship , hmmmm, 6 draws at the weekend. my case rests.
Complain about this comment
#165, and in particular #170 These comments are typical of nationalist politicians really: snide, economical with the truth, and a very selective view of history. Also designed to be insulting and incite a narrow English Nationalist response. You succeed too often on Nick Robinson's blog, but I have no intention of playing THAT game.
In general, I like Scots, and would be very happy with A Scots prime minister, just not this one. I very much mourn the loss of Robin Cook, in my view the best Parliamentarian of his generation.
Complain about this comment
Like most people with normal sensibilities, I have to confess to feeling bored by the ongoing outrage of Sir Fred Goodwin's pension. Of course, this is what the rogue is counting on.
All the same, my interest was momentarily rekindled on hearing that paparazzi are being offered large sums of money for photographs of Sir Fred 'enjoying his millions'.
What a wonderfully apt (if somewhat mild) form of retribution. Go
for it guys!
Complain about this comment
This post is a distraction from the real concerns that I have. China are putting up the largest cash amount for this stimulus package post G20. Therefore, they are proving that they are now the world's new economic super power. Doesn't this show that the power has already shifted from West to East! and that the US is most likely going to fall from grace in the near future in much the same way the USSR did? What will the world be like without the same strong presence that the US has had over the last few decades? With talk of the New World Order that is being bandied about, I think it poses the question, what exactly will this 'new world order' look like?
http://www.freenation.org.uk
Complain about this comment
#159 ehbahgum
To: Jericoa, glenafon, rbs_temp, oldnat, Sutara, JadedJean and alexandercurzon.
Why not get together with all those ideas and form a new political movement.
I'm sure you could, collectively, iron out your differences.
Add Somali_pirate_SP500, NewProtectorCromwell, WeeScamp and GRIMUPNORTH77 and you have the makings of an old days full size cabinet.
I'm honoured to be included in such a list HOWEVER I believe the problem with 'Party' Politics is summed up in your second paragraph where we need to 'iron out our differences' AND we need to get elected AND funding to get elected.
The 'Party' practice of Whips and having to back party policy and a vote loss being so 'media important' just completely stifles proper debate and correct decisions/votes being taken. Far better to have 501 people elected all on their own manifestos and then they all vote for a leader and a cabinet - each policy is then bought to the 'House' and voted on as a yeah or a nay but independently - each policy needing a majority to be followed.
Getting Voted In - each person would be independent so if they were putting forward coherent policies they would have a chance - as independents every individual would be able to put forward their policies if elected but there would be no loss of face if the other 500 voted out the policy.
Funding - this is more tricky - campaigning, leaflets, deposit to stop everyone applying to be elected - need to somehow eliminate the need to be wealthy to stand for election - I suppose individual sponsorship may work if there were no large parties any more?
The whole idea is obviously pretty naive and innocent but wouldn't it be great if we could somehow create - lets face it we're pretty close to one party politics already except without the voting freedom.
Complain about this comment
@ braveEddison
> Morally I disagree, legally a contract is a contract. If all had gone well, would there have been such a fuss - I don't think so.
Bravo! Win the war, and who's gonna fuss about the war crimes...?
Complain about this comment
youngmkv1 wrote:
So here's a question.
I was made redundant from RBs last year and prmised a particular sum including profit share, which at the time of the severance was"gauranteed".
How come Fred gets his full severance yet they are not paying mine?
Kidnap him and ask for ransom. You'd be morally justified.
Complain about this comment
#178
Let me suggest an improvement on your idea.
It is clear that the Labour and Conservative Parties have operated as a cartel for decades, and have operated primarily in their own interests and not those of the electorate. As a result they have taken us into illegal wars, devalued our currency, wrecked our economy, plunged us into massive debt, and destroyed all our institutions and public services.
Such conspiracies are illegal under both UK and EU law, and I propose that both parties should be disbanded prior to legal action.
In the interim a general election could be called, with all Labour and Conservative candidates being disqualified. That would be a good start on the road to recovery.
Complain about this comment
It is just a farce. Fred should have been sacked for gross misconduct and for trading whilst insolvent.
Complain about this comment
The FSA should be working with the SFO to sort out this mess by pinpointing the guilty and bringing them to justice.
Complain about this comment
It was a freely negotaited deal bewteen consenting adults. The fact that it has proved politically embarrassing to the Labour Party apparatchicks has now resulted in the current nonsense.
I would love to know how much this farce is costing RBS for the ongoing consultation with lawyers.All to no avail, as Fred is perfectly entitled to keep what he freely negotiated with the numpties. Whatever it is it will be in telephone numbers.Talk about chucking good money after bad.
I guess the RBS management don't have the balls to tell the political monkeys on their backs to stop digging when they are in a hole.
With a bit of luck for RBS and the "Government" it would all blow over if they let it.However, this is not likely to happen when professional windbags like "Mad Hatty" Harman (who is a lawyer and so should know better)have their own agenda to pursue by stirring it up again.
What a shower they are!
Complain about this comment
The only reason people say they are bored with the Fred Goodwin saga is because - NOTHING HAPPENS...!!!
The answer is - MAKE IT HAPPEN...!!! Go after him, and ARREST him...!! MAKE him surrender 75% of his pension plus the WHOLE of that obscene £2.7M lump sum he's been allowed to pocket.
The whole thing would be a whole lot less boring if the Government did that, I can assure everybody...! And least bored of all would be Goodwin himself...!!!
Complain about this comment
# 149
Yes you understand where we are and what is happening, what I dont understand is why the media do not? If they do they are deliberatley repressing that point of view, the people need to know what is happening for real so that we can put pressure on the incumbents and have a genuine agenda for change at the next election.
Maybe the lib dems are the only vaguely viable alternative, trouble is their leader is hardly the stuff of inspiration and they have a few jokers in the pack also (Mr Oughton and the like) so many people will not vote for them even if they do put together a manifesto with constitutional change in it.....pity. If they had a real talented and charismatic front man they would have agood chance of stealing the show next year.
>>>>>
I think that the situation will liven up towards the general election. The Tories and Liberals are holding back, I think, deliberately, because Gordon Brown swipes their best policies. The media are as uncertain as anyone else and very unsure on direction and the BBC are trying not to upset anyone too much as they don't want to see their revenues cut by the present or next government which shows that the BBC's funding needs to be more indepenedently assessed.
Complain about this comment
Whilst Goodwin may be contractually entitled to what has been agreed and therefore it has to be paid.
1) His pals on the former board seem to have acted against the interests ogf the company in agreeing this and may have witheld information from major shareholders (the government) in doing so.
As such they may be liable.
2) What's to stop the government introducing a 99% "rewards of failure" tax on Goodwin's pension?
Especially if this is applied to the pension pot and payable upon any payment or transfer (preventing Goodwin fleeing the country and transferring the pension pit beyond the reach of UK authorities)
Complain about this comment
#175 sashaclarkson
"#165, and in particular #170 These comments are typical of nationalist politicians really: snide, economical with the truth, and a very selective view of history. Also designed to be insulting and incite a narrow English Nationalist response. You succeed too often on Nick Robinson's blog, but I have no intention of playing THAT game.
In general, I like Scots, and would be very happy with A Scots prime minister, just not this one. I very much mourn the loss of Robin Cook, in my view the best Parliamentarian of his generation."
Really? It's sad that's what you think. Agreed Robin Cook was virtuous.
There was no malice in what I said, it was to be taken in good humour. English constitutional matters you will understand (as you English might do with Scottish ones)don't have to be taken with great reverence elsewhere.
I am not a nationalist politician of course, it's "Scottish sovereigntist" for me! But your so characterising them seems a lot more narrow minded than my post.
It was quite insulting of you to suggest that I wanted a negative response and that I presented facts as deliberately economical with the truth. It's more of a snidey slant on me that you should assume that.
I make a credible (and actually helpful) informed suggestion, in I admit, a familiar way (I am a friendly Scot). Your nose is out of joint? Why?
Complain about this comment
#175 sashaclarkson
You made a claim. I countered it. You then proceeded to make an ad hominen attack. That's normally a sign of a paucity of argument.
Complain about this comment
Ref #172. splendidhashbrowns
I totally agree with you that windfall taxes are retrospective legislation.
That's one of the reasons why I've argued against them in the past. Furthermore I also contended that they could be used as a precedent to justify more egregious "changing of the rules after the event". Both my contentions were rubbished at that time, on the basis of "no they aren't, so no they can't!", so thanks for the back-up!
Your second point is hypothetical. If RBS had gone bankrupt (OK. before anyone chips in, I know only individuals can go bankrupt not companies, but it's a useful shorthand!), then the case would be as you say.
But they didn't.
They carried out a fully underwritten (yes, by the Govt.)rights issue and so restored their capital base.
(Going off at a complete tangent for a moment, it appears to me that strictly speaking Banks are in a permanent state of insolvency! I doubt any bank in the world could repay all it's debts/deposits if they were all demanded at once. That's a run! Could it be argued that it's actually a Bank's function [borrow short/lend long]to be insolvent on behalf of its borrowers? I'll have to think some more about that.)
Sorry, where was I? Oh yes!
Whether the Government should have chosen to underwrite the RBS issue is a different argument. They did, so all RBS's contracts and agreements (salaries, pensions, sports sponsorships, charitable sponsorships etc.)remain binding.
As for turning over the pension funds, sorry, either that's dependent on the bankruptcy that didn't happen, or it's retrospective action again!
Complain about this comment
This may be a bloomin obvious question but...
Why is this man still 'Sir' Fred Goodwin and not plain Mr Fred Goodwin. Surely the honour of a knighthood was granted for services to the UK ?
Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't the 'service' of bringing RBS to the point of ruin, creating a huge burden on every UK tax payer and walking away with millions in cash as a payoff warrant being stipped of his knighthood ?
Next you will tell me Gordon Brown deserves to be PM... Doh !!!
Complain about this comment
U13904484 (#191) "Why is this man still 'Sir' Fred Goodwin and not plain Mr Fred Goodwin. Surely the honour of a knighthood was granted for services to the UK ?
Hmmm. is it because HMG and the bank CEOs are really all in cahoots, and that all the recent sound and fury from Ministers (e.g Myners and Brown) about how venal the bankers are has really just been a load of rhetoric to hide the great appreciation of what a good job they think they have done in getting the hapless taxpayers to pay for PFI/PPP given that the markets didn't look like they were going anywhere? Otherwise, presumably, they wouldn't have paid them those big bonuses for last year, nor the pensions, nor given them honours... yes?
Is that it?
Complain about this comment
So Sir Philip Hampton wants us to stop flogging RBS over the Fred Goodwin pension. I don't think we should, and I think the story should be kept in the public eye for a long time to come.
While RBS (like other banks) are still evicting people from their homes and failing to support business through loans, their unbelievable pay-off off Fred is, and will remain, morally wrong. Now we hear he took a tax-free lump sum!!
This is why people are still angry at RBS and the other banks who have brought us to this dire financial state.
Complain about this comment
Peston has it that "a pre-condition of economic recovery is that asset prices have to stabilise and then rise in a sustained way" - Or in other words he says "We need a new bubble". This isn't just a certain Mr Peston speaking, this is what the "best economic brains" on the planet are saying as well. How grim, how miserable, how pathetic. Is that the best they can do ? - try http://www.worldnews.blog-city.com for something more constructive - remember we haven't actually run out of anything real - are you sure what they are saying about us being poor is actually true ?
Complain about this comment
No more boom and bust - no more boom and bust - no more boom and bust, if you hear it often enough you start to beleive it. I am sure investors beleived it, so why should n't the banks relax their guard because they were told over and over again that there was no more boom and bust. The people responsible for this slogan should loose their pension - they are as guilty as the bankers.
Complain about this comment
What was RBS's Johnny Camerons golden handshake and bonus?
Most of the real problems seemed to come from his division.
What was Tom McKillop's? (I actually suspect from looking at Tom McKillop's face, he may have done the honorable thing)
Complain about this comment
Surely as a director Sir Fred owes a duty of care to the share holders and it should be argued that he failed in that duty. I also read somewhere that RBS was paying 290GBP a day for his security and I am surprised if this was part of his contract, therefore he should fund this himself
Complain about this comment
Goodwin should NOT receive this pension. He failed and failed catastrophically. It is his fault and he should carry his responsibility for failure like a man. Unfortunately, he is a weak individual, and one that deserves NO reward, especially a pension generated from tax payers' funds.
There is a strong case for litigation and he should have to prove his case in the Court that he is worthy to receive such a massive pension. There was never a rule written that couldn't be circumvented.
At a time of rising unemployment, now with 9000 RBS staff facing the sack, Goodwin is an absolute disgrace and should NOT receive this pension. He has demonstrated crass stupidity and lack of judgement, caused incalculable damage for pushing through such a risky business plan.
Let him fight in the Courts for his supper.
Complain about this comment
Today thousands of RBS pensioners who served the Royal Bank of Scotland and NatWest loyally for years received notification of their annual pension increase - a paltry 0.1% - repeat 0.1%. Thus, for a pension currently at £10,000 per annum the increase will be £10 per annum before tax.
If this disparity between our pensions and the outrageous sum granted to Goodwin does not stir his conscience then he deserves to be hounded unmercifully for ever by the media.
I hope Robert Peston can use this ammunition.
Complain about this comment
Sir Fred's pension/pension pot are obscene: however some at least was
acquired during his term of office and was there for all to see in the
Accounts. The benefits reflected his position in the Bank and when he took it from obscurity to the fifth biggest in the world I did not hear
any adverse comments from shareholders/politicians/cabinet ministers.
We have all lost as a result of his bad judgement (acquisition of Dutch
Bank) including Sir Fred who has lost a very lucrative position
Before politicians criticise Sir Fred they should sort out their Expense
Package and do away with 2nd home perks/family payments for no work. They
between then have taken more from the taxpayer than Sir Fred ever will!!
Complain about this comment
A example of how far and willing an US commercial company is willing to go protect its reputation and its interests.
BBC 15 April.
'Domino's Pizza says it has fired two US employees who posted videos online of themselves behaving "inappropriately".'
'the police had issued a felony warrant for the two people involved and the company also planned to file a civil lawsuit.'
How about bankers, banks, and UK plc ?
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS