Sir Fred & Retrospective Legislation

[Troll]

Ms Harman said the payout was "money for nothing" and vowed that the ex-Royal Bank of Scotland chief executive would not end up with the cash even if his retirement deal proved legally watertight.

Sir Fred, blamed for leading RBS to near collapse and a taxpayer bail-out, has resisted demands that he give up the lucrative package which he insists was approved by ministers.

But Ms Harman, Labour's deputy leader, said that all necessary steps would be taken if the 50 year old would not do the "honourable" thing.

"Sir Fred should not be counting on being £650,000 a year better off as a result of this because it is not going to happen," she told BBC1's Andrew Marr show.

"The Prime Minister has said it is not acceptable and therefore it will not be accepted. It might be enforceable in a court of law this contract but it's not enforceable in the court of public opinion and that's where the Government steps in."

Ms Harman declined to say exactly what action could be taken but reports this week have suggested a special Act of Parliament was being considered by Downing Street as a last resort.

"The Prime Minister has asked him to forego it and obviously we want him to do that - that's the most straightforward and honourable way to do it.

"It is being crawled over by the lawyers to see whether it is actually an enforceable legal contract.

"So I don't want to jump ahead of it but I do want to be clear that the Prime Minister has been quite emphatic about this that he regards it as unacceptable."

She said the payout was a reward for failure

She said the payout was a reward for failure I can just see all those Labour Ministers queuing up to hand back their pensions

a special Act of Parliament was being considered by Downing Street as a last resort.I'm sure the Human Rights lawyers will have a field day!

I wonder if this will all quietly fade away and be forgotten about once the next storm brews up

[Paddy]

She said the payout was a reward for failure I can just see all those Labour Ministers queuing up to hand back their pensions

a special Act of Parliament was being considered by Downing Street as a last resort.I'm sure the Human Rights lawyers will have a field day!

I wonder if this will all quietly fade away and be forgotten about once the next storm brews up

I don’t think new laws are necessary because existing company law makes his actions illegal ie He appointed directors and gave them a pay rise in return for in creasing his pension when he know the company was insolvent. Furthermore he was not acting in the best interests of the shareholders other than himself.. If one of use had acted in this manner we would have been arrested by now.

[ratewhore]

I don’t think new laws are necessary because existing company law makes his actions illegal ie He appointed directors and gave them a pay rise in return for in creasing his pension when he know the company was insolvent. Furthermore he was not acting in the best interests of the shareholders other than himself.. If one of use had acted in this manner we would have been arrested by now.

Nice words, but unless it can be proven in court, it's all hypothetical. As I said last week, I fail to see what the Govt can do. They signed off on it because they are incompetent.

And, as Troll says, any laws on refunding 'rewards for failure' should apply to all of the cabinet as well...

[BrowneIssue]

Once the government has finished spending £8m getting this £695k off him, we can be reassured the money will be used to put the 2 million unemployed back into work and fix the NHS.

It's not even a million quid. Really, does it matter? Compared to Northern Rock, for example.

Wouldn't the energy and care be better spent worrying about avoiding war in the middle east?

I wonder what the government is trying to bury in this this fuss? Their culpability, perhaps?

It is pathetic paper-clip management but on a national scale.



PS Just for the record, anyone who knows me and of my experiences with NatWest will know my preferred option is to slowly simmer their management in dilute acid such that they get corroded to death over about seven days.

[milanbenes]

Brown Issue,

'£695k off him',

<cough>,

it's not £695k,

it's £695k every year !

it's an annual £695k pension

care to think on that again ?

Milan.

[MrMark]

I'm beginning to favour the lynch mob approach (ok, maybe not, as it's a slippery slope)

Goodwin took hard line on "clawing back" RBS pensions:

rbs pensions

Former Royal Bank of Scotland employees will have their company pension payments slashed when they get to state retirement age - and Sir Fred Goodwin, the bank's richest pensioner, personally rejected union pleas for leniency over the so-called "clawback" provisions.

It has also emerged that Goodwin altered the arrangements for early retirement three years ago, raising the minimum age at which employees could take it from 50 to 55 - and then only if pensions were cut by between 20% and 40%.

[BrowneIssue]

BrowneIssue,

'£695k off him',

<cough>,

it's not £695k,

it's £695k every year !

it's an annual £695k pension

care to think on that again ?

Milan.

I know it is. Any idea how much the Civil Service costs to run every minute?

There are about 650 MPs. Them discussing this and reading memos on it will burn up that sum just arguing the toss about it.

It is a drop in the ocean. Not important. Immaterial.

On a national scale, it is as important as you picking up a penny.

It will not save the country.

It is a pathetic threat of revenge by mewling impotent incompetents.

They are buying a soundbite.

Fiddling. While the City burns.

[minestrone]

Sometimes you have to move on, the guy totally fecked up but the shareholders were right behind him. The goverment let him do what he was doing and nobody bothered there.

I would not be suprised if someone had mentioned using anti terror legislation to get the money out of him.

[Sysman]

The Daily Mash

[dude69]

It's the latest in a long line of ridiculous and undemocratic laws by Zanu Labour.

* You work for a company for 10 years and are highly commended for the job you did during that time
* After being there a while it turns out that you are no longer up to the job and you get sacked.

Do you lose your pension rights in this situation?

Of course not. Basic labour law, you can never take people's pensions away. Are we regressing to the 19th Century with arbitrary treatment of staff at Brown's whim?

Brown wants to make undemocractic legislation directed against a single person to deflect attention from Brown's gross incompetence.

Shameful.