Sir Fred Goodwin
Peter Hoskin 5:11pm
And so Fred Goodwin has lost his knighthood. Here's the Cabinet Office statement (and some of my previous thoughts here):
UPDATE: And here's David Cameron's statement:'It will soon be announced in the London Gazette that the Knighthood conferred upon Fred Goodwin as a Knight Bachelor has been cancelled and annulled.This decision, not normally publicised in advance, was taken on the advice of the Forfeiture Committee, which advised that Fred Goodwin had brought the honours system in to disrepute.
The scale and severity of the impact of his actions as CEO of RBS made this an exceptional case.
In 2008 the Government had to provide £20bn of new equity to recapitalise RBS and ensure its survival and prevent the collapse of confidence in the British banking and payments system. Subsequent increases in Government capital have brought the total necessary injection of taxpayers’ money in RBS to £45.5bn.
Both the Financial Services Authority and the Treasury Select Committee have investigated the reasons for this failure and its consequences. They are clear that the failure of RBS played an important role in the financial crisis of 2008-9 which, together with other macroeconomic factors, triggered the worst recession in the UK since the Second World War and imposed significant direct costs on British taxpayers and businesses. Fred Goodwin was the dominant decision maker at RBS at the time.
In reaching this decision, it was recognised that widespread concern about Fred Goodwin’s decisions meant that the retention of a Knighthood for “services to banking” could not be sustained.'
‘I welcome Forfeiture Committee's decision on Fred Goodwin's Knighthood. The FSA report into what went wrong at RBS made clear where the failures lay and who was responsible. The proper process has been followed and I think we've ended up with the right decision.’
Previous
Maggie
January 31st, 2012 5:25pm Report this commentAnother victory for the mob who've for been whipped up into a state of mass hysteria by irresponsible broadcasters. Why don't we just arrange for a lynch mob to finish him off?
Ghengis
January 31st, 2012 5:26pm Report this commentBankers first, Ministers second, and Lords a deserving third.
Olu Ojedokun
January 31st, 2012 5:28pm Report this commentThe logic of this decision/position is that all those bankers who were knighted and headed banks that failed should also be de-knighted.
ron wyatt
January 31st, 2012 5:29pm Report this commentWell the way I see it, as Dave is more than happy to ignore those who voted him in(I'm using very kind words here), then I can do the same.
So Ken, you will have my vote in May, even though I can't stand him.
Politics is a dirty game you know.
Colin
January 31st, 2012 5:40pm Report this commentSO, who from the previous government is going to be stripped of what?
Given that the previous government created the regulatory regime and the policy frameworks under which Fred and his henchmen operated.
Just asking...
Hexhamgeezer
January 31st, 2012 5:48pm Report this commentGood,
And talking about bringing the honours system in to disrepute, could I nominate with the deepest disrepect 'Baron' Michael Martin to have all honours, positions and privileges removed with immediate effect.
Austin Barry
January 31st, 2012 6:03pm Report this commentLogically then, no Lord Gordon Brown of Provincetown.
daniel maris
January 31st, 2012 6:18pm Report this commentSome of you really don't get it do you?
This guy was part of a system that resulted in 21,000 people losing their jobs - a devastating experience for most people that can have serious health consequence leasing to a reduction in lifespan.
Just reflect on that for a while.
Personally I don't think any banker is worthy of Kighthood at any time. Banking is merely an ancillary activity of a productive economy. The fact that we've relied on others productivity and done well out of it for a couple of decades, shouldn't blind us to that.
Banking requires little creativity or imagination and CEOs of banks are little more than figureheads for a huge collective effort.
Chris
January 31st, 2012 6:19pm Report this comment@Maggie
Sorry, what is 'mob-like' about stripping someone who made disastrous decisions contributing to the financial crisis, his honour for "services to banking"?!
The real prat here is Gordon Brown - who gave him this title in the first place. He looks the real fool now.
daniel maris
January 31st, 2012 6:23pm Report this comment...and whether a bank succeeds or not is really down to chance as much as anything else. Hardly anyone in banking or outside seems much good at forecasting. I've regularly beaten the OBR and the OECD in my forecasts.
Had Ex-Sir Fred made his acquisitions four years earlier and retired he'd probably be remembered as a sage of the City.
Bank CEOs rely on talented IT staff and financial analysts. Their decisions are generally pretty obvious ones - closing down branches hardly requires much talent.
Leonard of Quirm
January 31st, 2012 6:37pm Report this commentC'est pour encourager les autres ...
MilkSnatcher
January 31st, 2012 7:07pm Report this commentBad cases make bad law (to mangle a phrase). Goodwin probably did deserve to lose his knoghthood but his extreme case will now be used by the Socialist Establishment to justify every bit of banker-bashing no matter how undeserved. Canary Wharf is beginning to resemble Salem and Ed Miliband is trying to play Judge Hathorne. Shame he looks like Beaker.
Tanuki
January 31st, 2012 7:11pm Report this commentThis would be a good opportunity for the PM to call time on the whole corrupt and nepotistic cringefest that calls itself the 'honours' system.
David Ossitt
January 31st, 2012 7:28pm Report this comment“This decision, not normally publicised in advance, was taken on the advice of the Forfeiture Committee, which advised that Fred Goodwin had brought the honours system in to disrepute.”
On the advice of the Forfeiture Committee!
Well, well, well, I wonder how often they meet as a full committee.
This is nasty, it is malicious, it is cruel and utterly pointless, if this was a regular standard practise then possibly it is the right thing to do but it is not.
Our governments have over the years asked our Sovereign to award knighthoods to many who were less than deserving and governments have sent to the House of Lords dipshits, crooks, and incompetents of every type.
And yet few are ever defrocked as it were.
But this incompetent man is to be made scapegoat, when his friend and ally the mad bad Gordon Brown can draw his salary for not doing his job.
It stinks rotten.
Jannie Geldenhuys
January 31st, 2012 7:38pm Report this commentAnd what of the knighthoods of Sir James Crosby (HBOS) and Sir Vicrot Blank (Llyds)? Those need to be re-considered too.
Simon Stephenson.
January 31st, 2012 7:48pm Report this commentdaniel maris : 6.18pm
No, you're the one who doesn't get it. Do you not realise that a sixty-million people society must operate on a due process of rules and principles - and that singling out one person for extralegal treatment is neither fair to that person nor to the rest of society?
When are Sir Peter Viggers and Sir Gerald Kaufman going to lose their gongs? Or Sir Callum McCarthy or Lord Turner. Or Lords Hanningfield, Taylor of Warwick, Bhatia and Paul. Or Baroness Uddin? Or Lord Stevenson? Or Sir Tom McKillop. When is Tony Blair or Gordon Brown going to be suspended from the Privy Council?
It's better to address the problem rather than seek to blame it all on a scapegoat, don't you think?
davvers
January 31st, 2012 9:24pm Report this commentThose of us who were real bankers with real banking qualifications found it difficult to understand how he was even considered for a K. It was obvious to us that as he and his chairman had not a single banking qualification between them it was only a matter of time before he cocked it up especially considering the eye watering profits RBS was making which us minions could believe were real. Must admit I didn't think he would make SUCH a mess of it but I certainly had no RBS shares .
daniel maris
January 31st, 2012 9:24pm Report this commentNonsense, there's nothing "extra-legal" about this. It's simply a reflection of society's natural repugnance at the way bankers behaved and continue to behave, snaffling huge undeserved bonuses while they throw people out of work and treat small business people like something on the bottom of their shoe.
Rotten Tomato
January 31st, 2012 9:26pm Report this commentThis is a disgusting and demeaning act but entirely in keeping with a government that sets one against the other in order to justify its failure to honour its own contracts.
Redneck
January 31st, 2012 9:39pm Report this commentDaniel Maris @ 6.18 & 6.23
I think you're being economical with the truth. There is a lot more to succeeding in global banking than you indicate, in my opinion. Certain groups have been uncannily successful over the years. Is this down to good IT etc?
daniel maris
February 1st, 2012 12:14am Report this commentRedneck,
The Chinese State Bank has been very successful. What's that down to do you think?
The Co-op Bank seems to do quite nicely - did you have them in mind?
daniel maris
February 1st, 2012 12:14am Report this commentSuccess in banking has a lot to do with luck, government policy and what I might call "position" (now would be a good time to start a Falklands Bank if the oil deposits are for real). An individual CEO may have some influence, but as we saw with Ex-Sir Fred...geniuses can turn into numskulls in the blink of an eye.
Back to top