Harriet Harman on Sir Fred Goodwin

Jennifer_Jane

Oblivion, whilst I congratulate you on your prudence and am sure you have been part of a hard-working family.... your signature is boastful and self-satisfied to a point of smugness. If you're happy with that result, well fine.

Anyway, we have no way of knowing if these savings are as a result of a lifetime of crime/a redundancy payout/downsizing your home, or just plain lucky that you were in a position to save. Or even if it's true.

So, I have no problem with it, but it does say quite a lot about you.....:rolleyes:

Jen
x

Cleaver

Oblivion wrote: »

I happen to be proud and happy that my prudency throughout life has resulted in a positive balance to see me through my retirement. If that bothers you ... tough!

"I must correct a misconception you seem to have created ... a classic case of 'reading what you think I said' rather than what I actually said."

I didn't question the fact that you had been prudent and had saved money, I questioned whether bragging about it on an internet forum is particulary normal.

I'm arguing about whether it's a good idea to publicise your life savings to a bunch of strangers like a name badge. I need a break from here methinks.

Sapphire

maninthestreet wrote: »

The idea that parliamentary time should be spent debating a new law that is aimed solely at a single, private individual would be laughable, if it wasn't so serious.

It should definitely be spent debating a new law aimed at all the individuals who are receiving massive payouts – in the shape of bonuses and/or pensions, particularly in cases when they have presided over massive failure, and where taxpayers are having to pick up the pieces after the event.

These people – and others who would be inclined to behave in a similar way – need to learn that there is no reward for such action. In my view, the whole bonus culture needs to be strictly curtailed – no individual should be paid hundreds of thousands, let alone millions, as a bonus. It encourages greed and fraudulent practices.

beaujolais-nouveau

Jennifer_Jane wrote: »

Oblivion, .... your signature is boastful and self-satisfied to a point of smugness.... So, I have no problem with it, but it does say quite a lot about you....

Yes, it says Oblivion has no class.

Cannon_Fodder

Harman said "The prime minister has said that it is not acceptable and therefore it will not be accepted,"

"And it might be enforceable in a court of law, this contract, but it is not enforceable in the court of public opinion and that is where the government steps in."



Whilst agreeing that Sir Fred should not have got the pension, that RBS board need investigating for fraud by their shareholders, and the Govt "should have gone to specsavers" when checking the paperwork...

...this sort of statement by Ms Harman is worrying.

Probably it will turn out to be hot air, distracting from other matters, like the odd £300Bn of dodgy assets we now have a share in.

But, one wonders, should this threat be acted upon, how far away from a dictatorship does this put us?

Where is the referendum data that supports her view of current "public opinion" ?

Maybe the silent majority are silent because they think he should keep his pension. How do they test public opinion - just by whoever shouts loudest? That was a favourite method when they were in opposition, stirring up riots over poll tax etc., so maybe old habits die hard.

Various public surveys have indicated 60%-70% in favour of restoring the death penalty in the UK - but the Govt says it is their place to "ignore public opinion and instead consider such things dispassionately"

Dual standards; pot, kettle, black. Etc, etc.

Kez100

I do think now they need to get on with doing a proper job and bring in the fraud squad. If there was none we can all get on with matters. If there was, then we need to establish what and who (so we don't just blame the headliners) and get on with it through our legal process and cease assets over which the country has legal power.

We really cannot go on changing laws to suit the mood. More especially asour media manage to whip up public mood in a tunnel visioned way.

We do, indeed, seem to be becoming more of a dictatorship and I wonder really how much AD has had in all of this and whether he is really just a puppy dog, which does worry me as GB clearly has overinflated ideas of himself (saving the world etc)

Luckily we can get rid of him soon.

Kenny4315

Public floggings for all these useless BANKERS .

Pennywise

beaujolais-nouveau wrote: »

Parliament is the least worst option, in my view. What we have at the moment is government by Cabinet which is not democratic and is extremely short-sighted.

It's worse than that. Not only is it not Parliament deciding, it's not even the cabinet! Just like Tony Blair and the Iraq war, it seems that decisions are being taken solely by the PM and an "inner circle" of advisers, many of whom aren't even MPs yet alone ministers. How on earth this can be defended is beyond me. We aren't in a democracy anymore - it is a dictatorship.

It is absolutely crazy that MPs and Parliament spend hours, days, even weeks on nannying and micro managing things, yet don't get a say on a war or virtual economic collapse.

At the very least, if there really is no time for full Parliamentary debate, there should be a kind of "war cabinet" made up of all party representatives to at least "advise" the PM on decisions, not his cronies. Having watched the workings of several cross party committees when televised, I have usually been impressed by the depth of knowledge and understanding and the cross party support - it's about as opposite to proceedings in the House of Commons as you could get. Surely, it wouldn't be too difficult to arrange an emergency meeting of the cross party finance committee to discuss how best to spend a few hundred billion pounds?

itsallagame_2

Um, looks like a Black Monday again, FTSE gone through previous lows.

Fred and everybody else’s pensions will be toast for many years if this keeps up.

handful

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=479806&in_page_id=2&position=moretopstories

Read this for an interesting view on the subject, and one that I wholeheartedly agree with. It just shows that this government can't resist the urge to spin in the direction of public opinion, even when it is negative spin.