Fred Goodwin will keep his pension

I’m no pensions expert but I have friends who are. Believe it or not, actuaries can be quite interesting people when you get to know them. My rigorous research over the past few days (buying pints for a couple of pensions wonks in a City pub) has led me to the conclusion that Harriet Harman was talking bollocks on the Andrew Marr show. I pretty much suspected that anyway, but it’s nice to have it confirmed by people who know what they are talking about.

It appears that there are only three ways that the government could force Fred Goodwin to give his £693,000 pension back. They are:

  1. Declare RBS bankrupt, in which case Sir Fred would only be entitled to £27,000 under the pension protection scheme. 
  2. Pass the Make Sir Fred Goodwin Give His Pension Back Act 2009; in other words a special law aimed specifically at Sir Fred and others in a similar situation.
  3. Show that Sir Fred was in some way fraudulent or professionally negligent and that therefore he must forfeit his pension rights.

None of these options is especially attractive. The normally sane and rational Vince Cable is advocating the first. However, declaring RBS insolvent would surely damage what’s left of the bank’s reputation even further and make it even less likely that the taxpayers’ investment in the bank would be paid back. Those who advocate beating up RBS and its executives even more than we have been doing should remember that we now own 70% of the benighted bank. Declaring RBS technically bankrupt might get the £693,000 back but the fallout could be very damaging and end up costing the taxpayer a lot more.

Likewise, passing a special law would be costly and would take up a considerable amount of parliamentary time. Any law would almost certainly be challenged by Sir Fred in Strasbourg under the European Convention on Human Rights. Even if the government eventually won, the whole thing could cost more than £693,000. And that’s not to mention the sound arguments against retrospective legislation.

Accusing Fred Goodwin of fraud and negligence would, no doubt, be popular in Harriet Harman’s court of public opinion but it would be extremely difficult to prove in a real court. In any case, even if it could be proved, the amount the government could claw back would still be dependent on the forfeiture terms in the pension scheme. At this point my friends got into all sorts of technical detail and, having had a couple of beers, I glazed over. The upshot, however, was that they don’t think this option has a cat-in-hell’s chance of success either.

Like the bankers’ so-called contractual bonuses, Fred Goodwin’s pension is something that could have been dealt with at the time the government bailed the banks out but which it is now almost certainly too late to do anything about.

Fred Goodwin will most likely keep his pension and to suggest that the government can prevent him doing so at this late stage is naive. As Michael White says, if Harriet Harman was preparing for a leadership bid after the next election she has now blown her chances. One of the most important rules for political leaders must surely be to avoid digging yourself into a hole on the Andrew Marr show.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Fred Goodwin will keep his pension

  1. roy says:

    just goes to further demonstrate how poorly conceived and rushed the bail outs were. did these idiots not see how poorly the golden goodbyes that stan o neal and charles prince got in 2007 for example? christ doesnt anyone at the treasury read the news!

  2. Jo Jordan says:

    What can we say? Had a drink in my local tonight and the average punter is just not interested. They may not understand how precarious the financial system is of course. But they are investing down-under and in places like Bulgaria. They might have the right idea.

    And with this fundamentally non-reply I can know tick the box and follow what everyone else has to say.

    Great conversation!

  3. Dear Daddy, when I grow up, I want to be a Pensions Wonk too!

  4. Rick says:

    Well you could do a lot worse. It’s as boring as watching paint dry but there’s lots of money in it.

  5. I love money, are there other types of wonks other than a pensions one? Being a wonk sounds great🙂 Do they have Wonks at Woolworths too?

  6. Rick says:

    Not any more. They’ve all been fired.

  7. The future’s not so bright for wonking afterall then? Hmmm, I wonder if there are any other wonks having trouble at the moment?

  8. Bina says:

    I can quite believe that Goodwin et al had no idea what jeopardy their banks were in. They were however all guilty of going into areas of activity where they had no understanding – even some of the people at the investment arms themselves didn’t understand. Companies were also ‘sold’ the same rubbish the banks were involved with and they have gone bellyup without any state aid. There are some savvy crooks out there still but you can be sure none of the fallout has or will affect them.

  9. Mick says:

    4. Include a cluse in the next budget to cap pensions/pension contributions. Fred might get his pension but he’ll be paying 100% tax on it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s