.jpg)
The increasingly eerie Harriet 'Harperson' Harman, Deputy Leader of the Labour Party and Orwellian law enthusiast, has turned her attentions to Sir Fred Goodwin.
Goodwin is the man who was in charge of Royal Bank of Scotland, which was recently bailed out by the taxpayer after posting record losses of £24 billion.
The argument stems from the fact that Goodwin has a pension of more than £650,000 a year.
Harman, Brown and several other key government figures object to the notion of other people being paid to fail, as they claim Britain's unwritten Constitution reserves such a role just for them.
OK, not quite - but in effect they might as well say that.
Here's Harman herself on the situation:
"His contract might be enforceable in a court of law, but it is not enforceable in the court of public opinion - and that's where the government steps in."
Excuse me? Since when has this government cared anything about public opinion? On this new found basis, will it be restricting immigration, scrapping the ID card scheme, building more prisons, restoring the death penalty for murder, holding a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty?
Harriet has the answer, if you know where to look. She goes on:
"Sir Fred should not count on being £650,000 a year better off... The Prime Minister has said it is unacceptable and therefore it will not be accepted."
Right. So now it's the Prime Minister's decision - make your mind up, Harriet.
I'm going to sleep a lot easier tonight knowing that the government feels it can retrospectively create a law to persecute one individual who is only receiving what was stipulated in his employment contract.
I'd feel slightly better if they weren't doing it entirely to take the heat off themselves - Brown is as responsible for the crisis as the 'Greedy Bankers'; he knew that the boom wasn't forever and what goes up must come down, but he was spending money and giving away assets like it was going out of fashion.
He, er, also signed off Sir Fred's pension deal, back in October.
What next? A special show trial for Sir Fred? I for one would be much more interested in an apology from the government and Brown calling a General Election.
But why do that when you can blame someone else?
Wednesday 4 March 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
This smacks of a big deflection exercise. What could be better for a corrupt, lying, deceiving, bankrupting, totalitarian mob like NuLab that to turn the attention of the nation to one man. It has certainly worked. The media and half the cabinet have spent days whining on about it. Despite the fact that all this about his pension was highlighted - in the press - back in October!
I know exactly what you mean, and I find the whole thing so creepy.
I can kind of understand the government trying, but the way the papers and so many people seem to buy into it hook, line and sinker.
Under normal circumstances the words 'The Prime Minister says it's unacceptable, so therefore it is unacceptable' almost chilled me at first - then I remembered we were talking about Brown and it made me laugh.
How bad does something have to be for him to find it unacceptable?
Post a Comment