political commentator * author * publisher * bookseller * radio presenter * blogger * Conservative candidate * former lobbyist * Jack Russell owner * West Ham United fanatic * Email iain AT iaindale DOT com
Friday, February 27, 2009
Exclusive: Fred the Shred's Payslip Revealed!
24 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Nice one! This Pension is wrong! Brown should forgo his Pension as well for the Economies failure:
Gordon Brown has presided over Labour’s economic strategy for a decade and a half. The Labour party wilfully followed and implemented Gordon Brown’s Economic Plan.
We now see Gordon Brown and Labour trying to gain political capital through stripping Fred Goodwin of his Pension. Whilst in my opinion the Goodwin Pension should be partially stripped back to the time when he (Goodwin) made reckless decisions as CEO of RBS, supported by a compliant board of directors (I hope they are not ‘due’ bumper Pensions as well). I do think this opens up an interesting Political point!
If Brown is advocating a removal of Fred Goodwin’s pension for taking ‘reckless decisions’ and forcing the banking group into failure and the tax payer picking up the tab. Why does Brown not have his Pension removed for doing a ‘Fred Goodwin’ on the whole economy? It was Brown’s mismanagement of the economy, its regulatory structure and arrogantly implementing policy changes that has caused hardship and savage economic contraction.
Maybe Gordon Brown should have his Pension ‘Shredded’ as he seems to have equalled Fred in his Financial Management skills.
As to the "Shame" and "Paid back due to gross failure":
My contract of employment provided for a 12 month notice period, which I voluntarily waived in October of last year. This amounted to the loss of one year's salary, and I discussed this with you at the time, when you indicated that it was both and appropriate and sufficient recognition of the circumstances.
Subsequent to this, you approached the Chairman of the Group remuneration committee to suggest that I should waive certain share related awards which would otherwise have vested upon my leaving the Group. Whilst difficult to value with precision, these had a value equivalent to about 3 months' salary at that time. During these discussions, I am told that the topic of my pension was specifically raised with you by both the Chairman of the Group remuneration committee, and the Group Chairman, and you indicated that you were aware of my entitlement, and that no further "gestures" would be required. On this basis, I agreed to waive my entitlement to the share related awards and and proceeded to subscribe for my full allocation of shares in the ensuing rights issue.
Like you, I believed that these gestures were appropriate in the circumstances, and sufficient, and revisiting the position today, I believe that they remain so.
I'm not sure waiving a contractual right to a year's salary (which would have been over £1M) was an indication of a total lack of shame and remorse.
And given the appalling way the government has tried to use him as a scapegoat and the media has ignored that little genture, I bet he regrets having even tried in the slightest to show remorse.
"Right" said Fred, "I'm the bloody chairman RBS is f***ed, I'll have to go" He went softly, gave up on his money But he kept 'is pension And so we had a media frenzy
"Right" said Fred, "Now I've quit the comp'ny 13 grand a week will have to do Take it easy, no need to be thrifty Coz I've got my pension" And so we had a media frenzy
And Gordon had a think and he thought he ought to get the bank he'd rescued To check they'd not been too screwed But the Board all said they were happy to pay Fred
"All right," said Fred, "time to put my feet up With my pension I've got loadsa dough." Board had screwed up, media threw their arms up Should have blocked his pension, but no! So Fred said, "give me a massive monthly cheque." The Board said, "right-o."
And Gordon had a think, and he said, "Look, Fred, I'll give the job to Prescott And we'll sue you for the whole lot If you don't want flak you should pay your pension back."
"Right," said Fred, " Have to take you all down, So I'll write and tell you where to go." Prove the Gov'ment had approved the payment So I'll keep my pension" And so we had a media frenzy.
"Right," said Fred, pulling out a pencil With one letter gave a mighty blow. Board's in trouble, Myners prob'ly double, more of Labour's misdeeds come home, But Fred's scot-free 'cept for on the BBC And so we went home.
Every hour that passes makes me hope he keeps every penny of his pension. He doesn't deserve it, but nor does he deserve to have an incompetent government trying to get it back from him. As Richard Littlejohn said this morning, the first person who should have his pension withdrawn should be Gordon Brown.
Why ARE the Tories being so utterly useless over this?
Very amusing, Mr Dale. But the Shred's daylight robbery is a complete irrelevance in the context of our capital contribution to RBS of £33 billion, so far, and our underwriting of £312 billion of their "assets", half of which probably aren't worth the paper they're printed on.
The word "billion" is in danger of losing its significance, so easily is it now bandied about.
Brown's actions show all the coordinated strategic direction of a headless chicken, on speed, and his charitable largesse towards the bastard banks, with our money, is going to have an effect on the next 30 years that doesn't bear thinking about.
And it won't be thought about, will it, as long as we follow Brown's spin and misdirection, and allow ourselves to concentrate on such irrelevance as the Shred's pension.
Javelin, try this one (yours was VERY dated and edited!)
As for Fred and his pension, much as it 'sticks in my craw', he has every right to keep it. The man shows he has negotiating skills way above the people who were supposedly supervising him. He's shown them up for what they are and they're peeved. Tough.
Pity he didn't have the same sharpness of skill when buying that Dutch bank.
If I understand it right, contrary to popular, and long reported belief..
The FSA was NOT put in place by Gordon Brown. Gordon NEVER said he had ended boom and bust.. He never encouraged excessive lending.. He didn't know about the pension payout to bankers He has never heard about bankers bonuses. He didn't know what was going on in individual banks He didn't see a housing bubble He didn't see a credit bubble He never knew that Northern Rock was lending at 125% of value He had no idea the Royal Mail had been horrendously underfunded for at least 12 years.. He didn't have anything to do with the Lloyds/HBoS merger after all. He didn't know that no prisons have been built under his stewardship. He only just found out that the nuclear power stations require 10 years to build..
"I dinna ken, It was'nae me"
What has the man been doing for the last 12 years? Sitting in Downing street with his fingers in his ears? Seems if we had put a sack of spuds into number eleven we would not have fared any worse.
What I would like to say - it's very convenient that Fred is being singled out for something that is and was a much greater problem.
When everything was going swimmingly, you wouldn't see the politicians for dust. When something goes wrong in the financial sector - and they were partly to blame, they find it convenient to use the bankers as a scapegoat. I'm not saying that the bankers weren;t to blame but it is rather convenient that the politicians pass the bucj dont you think?
And another thing, Fred the shred, for 90% of the time, had made good decisions in RBS, and it was that 10% in the last couple of years that he started making mistakes. Why should one man, or indeed the other three be blamed for something that is a wider problem between the FSA, the government, the banks and the wider public, who have also indulged in silly borrowing regimes of their own.
We have to ask it's convenient for the politicians, because it makes them feel less guilty when they muck it up...
Goodwin is being used as chaff by Gordon Brown. Either Sir Fred is legally entitled to the money or he isn't. If he is, that should be an end to the matter as far as he (though not his former employer, or the government) is concerned.
For governments to start overriding valid contracts because it, or the public, doesn't like the outcome, is another giant step on the road to tyranny, as is the attempt by Brown and the press to bully Goodwin into giving up his contractual rights. Far better Goodwin should get some underserved millions than that we should go down that route.
Meanwhile public attention is being directed towards this comparitively trivial loss, rather than the squillions of our (as yet unearned) money that Brown is spending or putting at risk in a vain attempt to save his reputation.
I think this will play very badly for the Govt but it is easy to see why the govt want you to look at this rather than the bale out package. This is what John Redwoods blog says -
" RBS has to accept the first £19.5 billion of any loss, and pay £6.5 billion for the insurance. Taxpayers guarantee to pay 90% of the losses above the threshold.
Wait til you hear the rest. Taxpayers have to put up £19.5 billion of new capital in the form of B shares, and make available an additonal £6 billiion of equity if needed.
In other words, the so called tough deal on insurance is almost completely underwritten by new taxpayer capital; Taxpayers are offering the full amount of the losses RBS is said to “bear” itself, and £6 billion to pay the insurance premium "
What a shambolic situation. The govt are blatantly using taxpayers money to cover up their own festering incompetence.
Fred the Shred's pension is irrelevant. The media is (to Brown's delight) largely ignoring the big picture - the billions needed to bail out the banks. Wait for another diversion from Labour stooge Peston.
Shit! Is it really only £114,000 per annum or say one-sixth of the whole that is at stake? £3M out of his pot.
Really! I reckon he'll get £7M in cash to go away and we'll all be a lot happier than if we spend £10M on legal fees to reduce the pot by £3M. For example.
Labourlist.org has run the Great Leaders Radio Oxford Interview in full. The only comments on the site are totally hostile to the Governmnet's position and many are openly attacking Gordon.
Either Draper or Gordon are not long for this political world.
Oldrightie said... When will all this filter down to the public at large? What will it take for people to realise the depth of this mess? February 27, 2009 8:36 PM
Maybe when the BBC stop pretending that Gordon's initiatives can work.
24 comments:
Nice one! This Pension is wrong! Brown should forgo his Pension as well for the Economies failure:
Gordon Brown has presided over Labour’s economic strategy for a decade and a half. The Labour party wilfully followed and implemented Gordon Brown’s Economic Plan.
We now see Gordon Brown and Labour trying to gain political capital through stripping Fred Goodwin of his Pension. Whilst in my opinion the Goodwin Pension should be partially stripped back to the time when he (Goodwin) made reckless decisions as CEO of RBS, supported by a compliant board of directors (I hope they are not ‘due’ bumper Pensions as well). I do think this opens up an interesting Political point!
If Brown is advocating a removal of Fred Goodwin’s pension for taking ‘reckless decisions’ and forcing the banking group into failure and the tax payer picking up the tab. Why does Brown not have his Pension removed for doing a ‘Fred Goodwin’ on the whole economy? It was Brown’s mismanagement of the economy, its regulatory structure and arrogantly implementing policy changes that has caused hardship and savage economic contraction.
Maybe Gordon Brown should have his Pension ‘Shredded’ as he seems to have equalled Fred in his Financial Management skills.
As to the "Shame" and "Paid back due to gross failure":
My contract of employment provided for a 12 month notice period, which I voluntarily waived in October of last year. This amounted to the loss of one year's salary, and I discussed this with you at the time, when you indicated that it was both and appropriate and sufficient recognition of the circumstances.
Subsequent to this, you approached the Chairman of the Group remuneration committee to suggest that I should waive certain share related awards which would otherwise have vested upon my leaving the Group. Whilst difficult to value with precision, these had a value equivalent to about 3 months' salary at that time. During these discussions, I am told that the topic of my pension was specifically raised with you by both the Chairman of the Group remuneration committee, and the Group Chairman, and you indicated that you were aware of my entitlement, and that no further "gestures" would be required. On this basis, I agreed to waive my entitlement to the share related awards and and proceeded to subscribe for my full allocation of shares in the ensuing rights issue.
Like you, I believed that these gestures were appropriate in the circumstances, and sufficient, and revisiting the position today, I believe that they remain so.
I'm not sure waiving a contractual right to a year's salary (which would have been over £1M) was an indication of a total lack of shame and remorse.
And given the appalling way the government has tried to use him as a scapegoat and the media has ignored that little genture, I bet he regrets having even tried in the slightest to show remorse.
"genture" should have been "gesture", obviously!
If we break off from Scotland - does England carry the RBS and HBOS debt?
It will be interesting to see if Gordon has put any clauses into the contract to pass the buck onto England in the case of seperatism?
Here's a very short speech where Gordon makes a statement about Scottish independence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqLNQZjFJvI
Can you have a pay slip with just an amount and not wonder which supply lines goods aren't being transported by?
(With apologies to Bernard Cribbins)
"Right" said Fred, "I'm the bloody chairman
RBS is f***ed, I'll have to go"
He went softly, gave up on his money
But he kept 'is pension
And so we had a media frenzy
"Right" said Fred, "Now I've quit the comp'ny
13 grand a week will have to do
Take it easy, no need to be thrifty
Coz I've got my pension"
And so we had a media frenzy
And Gordon had a think and he thought he ought to get the bank he'd rescued
To check they'd not been too screwed
But the Board all said they were happy to pay Fred
"All right," said Fred, "time to put my feet up
With my pension I've got loadsa dough."
Board had screwed up, media threw their arms up
Should have blocked his pension, but no!
So Fred said, "give me a massive monthly cheque."
The Board said, "right-o."
And Gordon had a think, and he said, "Look, Fred,
I'll give the job to Prescott
And we'll sue you for the whole lot
If you don't want flak you should pay your pension back."
"Right," said Fred, " Have to take you all down,
So I'll write and tell you where to go."
Prove the Gov'ment had approved the payment
So I'll keep my pension"
And so we had a media frenzy.
"Right," said Fred, pulling out a pencil
With one letter gave a mighty blow.
Board's in trouble, Myners prob'ly double, more of Labour's misdeeds come home,
But Fred's scot-free 'cept for on the BBC
And so we went home.
Every hour that passes makes me hope he keeps every penny of his pension. He doesn't deserve it, but nor does he deserve to have an incompetent government trying to get it back from him. As Richard Littlejohn said this morning, the first person who should have his pension withdrawn should be Gordon Brown.
Why ARE the Tories being so utterly useless over this?
You got to ask yourself this:
Do shits stick to you on the way up or the way down?
City life is complex. Arthur Pigou - internalize the externalities. Whatever means necessary - ninja auditor!
Very amusing, Mr Dale. But the Shred's daylight robbery is a complete irrelevance in the context of our capital contribution to RBS of £33 billion, so far, and our underwriting of £312 billion of their "assets", half of which probably aren't worth the paper they're printed on.
The word "billion" is in danger of losing its significance, so easily is it now bandied about.
Brown's actions show all the coordinated strategic direction of a headless chicken, on speed, and his charitable largesse towards the bastard banks, with our money, is going to have an effect on the next 30 years that doesn't bear thinking about.
And it won't be thought about, will it, as long as we follow Brown's spin and misdirection, and allow ourselves to concentrate on such irrelevance as the Shred's pension.
Javelin, try this one (yours was VERY dated and edited!)
As for Fred and his pension, much as it 'sticks in my craw', he has every right to keep it. The man shows he has negotiating skills way above the people who were supposedly supervising him. He's shown them up for what they are and they're peeved. Tough.
Pity he didn't have the same sharpness of skill when buying that Dutch bank.
@Dick the Prick
Shit sticks on the way up. The higher you go the less the smell is noticed! (acclimatisation)
On the way down.........that's...... climate change.
Shit on both ends of the stick
Ooops Javelin, forgot to include the URL:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKBLgcAnzLY&feature=related
Is it any wonder the Scots don't want him?
When will all this filter down to the public at large? What will it take for people to realise the depth of this mess?
If I understand it right, contrary to popular, and long reported belief..
The FSA was NOT put in place by Gordon Brown.
Gordon NEVER said he had ended boom and bust..
He never encouraged excessive lending..
He didn't know about the pension payout to bankers
He has never heard about bankers bonuses.
He didn't know what was going on in individual banks
He didn't see a housing bubble
He didn't see a credit bubble
He never knew that Northern Rock was lending at 125% of value
He had no idea the Royal Mail had been horrendously underfunded for at least 12 years..
He didn't have anything to do with the Lloyds/HBoS merger after all.
He didn't know that no prisons have been built under his stewardship.
He only just found out that the nuclear power stations require 10 years to build..
"I dinna ken, It was'nae me"
What has the man been doing for the
last 12 years? Sitting in Downing street with his fingers in his ears? Seems if we had put a sack of spuds into number eleven we would not have fared any worse.
What I would like to say - it's very convenient that Fred is being singled out for something that is and was a much greater problem.
When everything was going swimmingly, you wouldn't see the politicians for dust. When something goes wrong in the financial sector - and they were partly to blame, they find it convenient to use the bankers as a scapegoat. I'm not saying that the bankers weren;t to blame but it is rather convenient that the politicians pass the bucj dont you think?
And another thing, Fred the shred, for 90% of the time, had made good decisions in RBS, and it was that 10% in the last couple of years that he started making mistakes. Why should one man, or indeed the other three be blamed for something that is a wider problem between the FSA, the government, the banks and the wider public, who have also indulged in silly borrowing regimes of their own.
We have to ask it's convenient for the politicians, because it makes them feel less guilty when they muck it up...
www.plenty2say.com
Goodwin is being used as chaff by Gordon Brown. Either Sir Fred is legally entitled to the money or he isn't. If he is, that should be an end to the matter as far as he (though not his former employer, or the government) is concerned.
For governments to start overriding valid contracts because it, or the public, doesn't like the outcome, is another giant step on the road to tyranny, as is the attempt by Brown and the press to bully Goodwin into giving up his contractual rights. Far better Goodwin should get some underserved millions than that we should go down that route.
Meanwhile public attention is being directed towards this comparitively trivial loss, rather than the squillions of our (as yet unearned) money that Brown is spending or putting at risk in a vain attempt to save his reputation.
I think this will play very badly for the Govt but it is easy to see why the govt want you to look at this rather than the bale out package. This is what John Redwoods blog says -
" RBS has to accept the first £19.5 billion of any loss, and pay £6.5 billion for the insurance. Taxpayers guarantee to pay 90% of the losses above the threshold.
Wait til you hear the rest. Taxpayers have to put up £19.5 billion of new capital in the form of B shares, and make available an additonal £6 billiion of equity if needed.
In other words, the so called tough deal on insurance is almost completely underwritten by new taxpayer capital; Taxpayers are offering the full amount of the losses RBS is said to “bear” itself, and £6 billion to pay the insurance premium "
What a shambolic situation. The govt are blatantly using taxpayers money to cover up their own festering incompetence.
Fred the Shred's pension is irrelevant. The media is (to Brown's delight) largely ignoring the big picture - the billions needed to bail out the banks.
Wait for another diversion from Labour stooge Peston.
Shit! Is it really only £114,000 per annum or say one-sixth of the whole that is at stake? £3M out of his pot.
Really! I reckon he'll get £7M in cash to go away and we'll all be a lot happier than if we spend £10M on legal fees to reduce the pot by £3M. For example.
Labourlist.org has run the Great Leaders Radio Oxford Interview in full. The only comments on the site are totally hostile to the Governmnet's position and many are openly attacking Gordon.
Either Draper or Gordon are not long for this political world.
GuF has reproduced this graphic without a hat tip. Who produced it? And are the figures on it correct?
The figures don't add up. Why was my post which pointed this out removed?
Oldrightie said...
When will all this filter down to the public at large? What will it take for people to realise the depth of this mess?
February 27, 2009 8:36 PM
Maybe when the BBC stop pretending that Gordon's initiatives can work.
Post a Comment