More like this
How we can get back Fred Goodwin’s RBS pension
The simplest way to deprive Sir Fred Goodwin of his undeserved £700,000-a-year pension is to tax it back at the next Budget
Ever since it was revealed that the disgraced Sir Fred Goodwin is getting a pension of £700,000 a year from RBS, the finest minds in punditry and politics have been wondering why they cannot find a way to take it off him.
With the taxpayer on the hook for hundred of millions of pounds thanks to the reckless way in which he brought RBS to its knees, the moral case for at least reducing it is impeccable. Yet no one can figure out how to get the money back.
Contractually, it seems, the deal is watertight. As for passing a special law to deprive him of it, not only would that set a dubious precedent but it might well fall foul of human rights law. City types - invariably well-pensioned themselves - have used the general bemusement to claim that we now need to move on to more important matters, and forget about personal retribution.
But this affair is so outrageous that it cannot just be forgotten; seeing justice done is a crucial part of closure. If we cannot get Goodwin's pension back in any other way, then the Government should use the Budget (due in April) to tax it back.
Nor should Goodwin be the only target. There are a few others who have managed to flee their failed banks with unjustifiably large pensions and are now keeping their heads down, hoping the storm will blow itself out on the hated Fred.
What is required is a way to catch them as well while sparing ordinary bank employees on normal pensions, and also those who left before disaster struck.
How about a simple clause saying that anyone in receipt of a pension from a bank that has received public funds, and which started less than a year before the public money was put in, would be subject to a special tax rate of, say, 99 per cent on any amount received in excess of £150,000 per year? That should do the trick, and the entire country minus about ten people would cheer it to the rafters. ·
Comments are now closed on this article
Comments
People wonder why things are going down the toilet? The answer is simple, yet again we see someone receiving remuneration that bears NO resemblance to the actual work done. Mr Stewart says leave the poor sod alone.. He did not lose RBS'S money. There is x amount of employees and in 2007 Freddie earned 11 billion for the said bank!!... I say NO he did't ,that was earned by all employees but who received the lion's share? Why Freddie of cause!! Get the picture.
Clearly Sir Fred's ill-gotten Goodwinnings indicate that he must have had Dick Turpin in his family lineage at some stage. The gall of the man running the bank into ruin yet expecting to keep his Golden Parachute "pension" is at the same rock-bottom as that of the others of his ilk who have responsibility for their equally shafting the other collapsing banks.
Dhurrr - you don't seriously think Sir Fred has got his spondulas anywhere where HMRC can get 'em, do you ? He may lack any formal banking qualifications, but he's not that stupid. He and his dosh are doubtless currently residing in some Caribbean paradise far away from this Sceptic Isle.
If they did pass a specific law to target him, it wouldn't be the first time. They passed the stupid change allowing double jeapody for a pair of kids who boasted they got away with murder, and they destroyed the entire cheese company who made Lancashire Blue (iirc) by passing a law that said that anyone trading with them was committing an offence. Both (very) bad law, but this government has passed thousands of those.
Justice for Sir Fred is precisely what's important. We've been lectured since 1979 on the moral superiority of unregulated markets, on the need to free people like Goodwin from fuddy duddy socialist red tape so they can 'create wealth' which, in turn, will trickle down to grateful wage slaves. All that's now blown up in their faces and the public, facing a nasty recession, know who the villains are and demand a meeting between law and justice, ask that the pain be shared. It's a sort of updated Dunkirk spirit and is deeply heartening. When people are losing their jobs, homes and savings, Goodwin and his ilk must not be seen swanning off with vast amounts of our money stuffed in their pockets. So it's no good saying 'move on.' People will 'move on' once the money's returned. What the senior banking sector, and their little echoes, are terrified of is anger at Sir Fred turning into a general attack on their bloated wages. See www.total-banker.com for a taste of what they have to lose. That's why they're now asking people to 'move on' - fear and greed. Well it won't wash.
What's important is that senior bankers get the message. If you play fast and loose with our money, don't expect to be rewarded. Take Fred's knighthood away for starters. "Services to banking"? Services to himself, more like! As for his obscene pension (a) make him wait until he's 65 and (b) tax it at 90%. I'm sure he could manage on a measly 70k per annum. Thanks to him a lot of people will have to manage on a lot less!
Vendettas are not really the most efficient use of time. By the time we have the added bureaucracy to carry out this job we enter in to another governmental department with over zealous growth issues that becomes to precious to put down.
Drop it and get on with what is important.