Jump to content

Fred Goodwin


Sorted

Recommended Posts

Driving the other morning and listening to a phone in on Radio Scotland about Sir Fred Goodwin. Felt quite happy after all the doom and gloom about how intolerant our society can be at times as caller after caller saw this gesture for exactly what it is, a token gesture.

I do not support the honours system in any way and will bow my head or doff my cap to no man, irrespective of his position or title but........ isn't ironic that the only individual with responsibility for this debacle that is pursued for retribution and humiliation is the son of a sparky from Paisley!

The decision to buy ABN Amro did not belong solely to Fred Goodwin in the same way the the successful decision to acquire Nat West was hot solely his. Every decision made by a CE is ratified by a board and the responsibility is collective. In this case it's even worse as subsequent approval was given by the FSA and the Bank of England!

If you check the names and titles of those who were party to the approval (and in effect the final go ahead) of, quite possibly, the most appalling business decision ever you will find that, where applicable, they all retain there prestige. None of these guys have been subject to the Goodwin treatment but all are 'collectively responsible'. Why?

Could it be that they belong to the Eton/Harrow set now so prevalent within our government? Can't go after our own can we Davie?

The Tories didn't even have the guts to put one of their one on show on the radio, leaving it to their lap dog Willie Rennine. A poor excuse for a political leader, he trotted out excuse after excuse for the non action even coming up with the classic- 'Just because there are many guilty parties doesn't mean you don't pursue some!' When challenged by a caller as to why, he had no answer other than because.

We all know from school that because is not an answer to why!

Yet another example of class humiliation from this pathetic public school government, living in their fantasy world of mansions and Bolly, intent on winning favour in the Home Counties at the expense of the rest of us. Come the glorious day!

  • Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is absolutely nothing working class about Goodwin and to suggest that the decision to strip him of his knighthood is something to do with schools and class is pure fantasy. He led the bank into the abyss, others (including Labour and the SNP) just clung to his coat tails while the going was good. But he single handedly did more damage than anyone. I suppose the extension to your argument is that another famous tyrant, Hitler, shouldn't be singled out for vilification, because everyone else stood back and let it happen? There you go, I've turned Godwin's Law into Goodwin's Law!

He's not being prosecuted or anything, its just that people have now realised that his overall contribution to the banking sector is not one that merits a knighthood. That seems fair enough to me. And anyway, the whole honours system is a joke and shouldn't be taken too seriously, it's all about politicians responding to public sentiment, or to political donations.

My only gripe is that he is being allowed to keep the word "Good" in his name.

Anyway, nothing much will change for him apparently:

http://newsthump.com/2012/02/01/goodwin-%e2%80%9ci%e2%80%99ll-just-pay-people-to-keep-calling-me-%e2%80%98sir-fred%e2%80%99%e2%80%9d/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goodwin took the job and all the benefits, perks and money that came with it....so only right that when the wheels fell off that he should find himself hung out to dry.

However, it was never a one man show and there's far more people who should be sharing accountability and the punishments that should come with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is absolutely nothing working class about Goodwin and to suggest that the decision to strip him of his knighthood is something to do with schools and class is pure fantasy. He led the bank into the abyss, others (including Labour and the SNP) just clung to his coat tails while the going was good. But he single handedly did more damage than anyone. I suppose the extension to your argument is that another famous tyrant, Hitler, shouldn't be singled out for vilification, because everyone else stood back and let it happen? There you go, I've turned Godwin's Law into Goodwin's Law!

He's not being prosecuted or anything, its just that people have now realised that his overall contribution to the banking sector is not one that merits a knighthood. That seems fair enough to me. And anyway, the whole honours system is a joke and shouldn't be taken too seriously, it's all about politicians responding to public sentiment, or to political donations.

My only gripe is that he is being allowed to keep the word "Good" in his name.

Anyway, nothing much will change for him apparently:

http://newsthump.com...80%99%e2%80%9d/

Interesting to note your definition of led. For the purposes of corporate governance, any company is controlled by a board of directors and a chair. It is impossible for any CE to carry out an acquisition of that magnitude without the full support and approval his board.

At no point did I make a statement that Fred Goodwin was working class. I merely gave you the facts. These remain that the only individual pursued for this decision is the one who grew up where I said he grew up, attended school where I said he attended school and whose father was employed doing what I said he did. If this leads you to the conclusion that this means I am promoting him as 'working class' you are clearly wrong. For me, the class system is promoted by the likes for Cameron and his cohorts to keep the rest of us in place. As I see it there are only too categories: those who contribute and those who don't!

I am no apologist for Fred Goodwin but find it astounding that the sheer hypocrisy of the decision taken is not being challenged more openly. Nothing in your post make him a more justifiable target than any of the many other lords. ladies, barons, commanders and knights involved in this process. Why only him?

Agree totally about the system, it is repugnant.

There were six 'honoured' individual on the RBS board and seven on the FSA (without even looking at the Bank of England). One has had his 'honour' removed whilst the rest waltz around Windsor, Kensington and Chelsea free from humiliation, responsibility or blame (aside of course from Sir Tom McKillop who was last heard of hiding in a mine near Darvel!). None have been targeted by Murdoch's press.

Edited by Sorted
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goodwin led the board. He would have been the influencial person. He would have had the casting votes on any 50/50 decisions. If this had been an industry where, due to neglect, people were killed or a disaster occurred he is the one who'd have been prosecuted. He is the one who handed out autonomy to make decisions on his behalf. He is the one who encouraged risk taking. The buck stops with him. That said I'd like to see those who nominated and voted for him to recieve a knoghthood being held to task over their decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is impossible for any CE to carry out an acquisition of that magnitude without the full support and approval his board.

Hmm, that's an interesting one. You are right in theory, but in reality it is different because a board is not a democaratic group of equals. Whether it is RBS or Rangers, one man is in charge and he calls the shots. Anyone who speaks out against his plans or is seen to question his authority is likely to end up either sacked or humiliated. I don't know whether the other directors had reservations, they surely did, but they would have learnt from experience that sometimes you just have to shut up and go along with it. After all, Fred knows what he is doing and has generated tremendous growth etc.

It doesn't make their complicity right, no way, but that's just what happens when you have a leader who has built an empire and is virtually unchallengable as a result.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which of these is the odd one out......

Lord Stevenson, former chairman, HBOS Bank

Andy Hornby, former CEO, HBOS Bank

Sir Fred Goodwin, former CEO, RBS Bank

Sir Tom McKillup, former chairman, RBS Bank

John McFall MP, chairman, Treasury Select Committee

Alistair Darling, Chancellor of the Exchequer

Sir Terry Wogan, presenter of the BBC Radio 2 Breakfast Show

It’s Terry Wogan, the only one with a banking qualification.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goodwin led the board. He would have been the influencial person. He would have had the casting votes on any 50/50 decisions. If this had been an industry where, due to neglect, people were killed or a disaster occurred he is the one who'd have been prosecuted. He is the one who handed out autonomy to make decisions on his behalf. He is the one who encouraged risk taking. The buck stops with him. That said I'd like to see those who nominated and voted for him to recieve a knoghthood being held to task over their decision.

Alex any stock market listed company that is led by it's CE is in breach of the LSE rules. A listed company will have a 'scheme of delegation' under which its CE/CEO will be given autonomy. Anything out with this scheme will be a board decision. The person who leads the board (supposedly on behalf of the shareholders) is the chairman not the CE unless of course they hold both positions (common in SMEs but almost unheard of in a listed company). This was not the case in RBS.

For too long, individuals of 'the proper standing' have been able to sit back and take the money when in positions of importance without fear of consequence. This is just another example of the 'hired help' being targeted and hung out to dry whilst those with ultimate responsibility hide. I

Goodwin is guilty. Just as guilty as the rest of them and not one iota more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which of these is the odd one out......

Lord Stevenson, former chairman, HBOS Bank

Andy Hornby, former CEO, HBOS Bank

Sir Fred Goodwin, former CEO, RBS Bank

Sir Tom McKillup, former chairman, RBS Bank

John McFall MP, chairman, Treasury Select Committee

Alistair Darling, Chancellor of the Exchequer

Sir Terry Wogan, presenter of the BBC Radio 2 Breakfast Show

It’s Terry Wogan, the only one with a banking qualification.

Brilliant! Says it all really......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you receive an Honour and then behave dishonourably it is only reasonable that the Honour is taken away. The only thing Mr Goodwin can reasonably take issue with is the large number of other recipients of Honours who have also behaved dishonourably and still retain their titles etc. I don't suppose he is too bothered though, he may have lost his knighthood but he still has all his dosh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Graeme Bennett is not a Director of Football.....hasn't been for quite some time now.

Re-read the comments CD....the question was 'have ever been' not 'are'

Still reads the same as the first time I checked it.....

Directors was referred to in the present tense, it was the being a footballer that was stated as "have ever been".

:moon:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After theBritish banking debacle had been slightly sorted by George Brown's very angry ultimatum given to these Bankers in Britain at his place about 1 a.m in the morning which gave them 2 hours to agree tp his offer, or go bankrupt, to which they ultimately and sullenly agreed at 3 a.m., saving the Britsh banking system from ruin, it miraculously transpired that Uncle Freddie had to sell his three million pound mansion in Edinburgh, presumably as a supposed Mea Culpa.

But..wait...in recent months it transpires that the same fella has just bought another mansion...but this time it is for 6 MILLION pounds. A pal of mine returned from Britain and showed me the lurid newspaper headlines that made my mouth drop.

Whatever the use of a knighthood meant to him , it did not stop his enrichment, clearly at the expense of the RBS shareholders did it. ? And I am fairly certain that Uncle Freddie continues to laugh all the way to the bank..... again..... and again....and again. The bonus he got when he quit the RBS was stomach turning and I have not the slightest doubt that he will have received a massive pension as well.

Dinna fash yersel o'er this commoner and likely lad. He will never suffer and may, at this very moment in time , be enjoying a martini and schapps at the fanciest hotel in Edinburgh with some of his pals and having a good lagh over the whole horrible and disgraceful business.

I worked for this outfit for 19 years (The Royal Bank of Scotland) and the way that it's ethics and practices have evolved since I left the Bank about 36 years ago is a matter of profound disbelief and must have the former employees of my generation, and before feeling very sad indeed at watching everything that they believed about the banking world disintegratimng before their eyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. : Terms of Use : Guidelines : Privacy Policy