Goodwin Intentions

I'm going to be very, very interested to see what the Government does about Fred Goodwin's pension.

They seem adamant that the pension cannot stand as it is. While the Womble was shouting himself hoarse encouraging his son's football team this morning, Harriet Harman (she of the divine looks 20 years ago) was busy doing some pontificating of her own on the Andrew Marr Show.

"Sir Fred Goodwin should not count on being £650,000 a year better off because it is not going to happen," Harman said. "It will not be accepted and the government will take action. This contract might be enforceable in a court of law, but it's not enforceable in the court of public opinion, and that's where the government steps in".

So, the contract through which Goodwin received this pension is entirely legal, it seems. Which suggests that taking any of the money off him would be illegal. But the government's going to do it anyway ? Or legislate in this one particular case ? That's to say they're either going to ignore the law or create a new one, just to turn Goodwin over ? Jumping Jesus.

Have you ever heard such priggish, righteous hubris in all your life ? Whatever we might feel about Goodwin taking £650K a year for doing nothing post his work at RBS, the facts are these:

1. His pension was agreed through fair and legitimate negotiation as part of his contract, either before or during is time at RBS;
2. Government ministers effectively sanctioned the pension as part of Goodwin's exit from RBS in the autumn.

The second point is absolutely crucial here. If' you get "asked to leave" a company, you negotiate, making damn sure that the conditions of your departure are as good for you as they can be, and you get them formally agreed and documented before you go. If you manage to get your bosses to agree to something that many would think outrageous, that's not your fault.

By all accounts, the minister at the centre of it all, Lord Myners, knew just what Goodwin's pension would amount to at the time. He now whinges that he hadn't known that the pension agreement in place for Goodwin was not contractually binding. Well, tough. Tough on him, and tough on us too, because we have to pay for his ignorance; but the government cannot now go back on their word and claw back money from Goodwin which they had agreed to give him.

We appear to be faced either with the government's lawyers finding some gift of a loophole in the Goodwin arrangements (unlikely), or the government legislating retrospectively to reverse what would otherise be a contractualy binding agreement. The second option really, really stinks, even by New Labour standards. It would mark a new low in their relationship with personal liberty were they to introduce a new law especially to deal with the ramifications from their own cock up.

Incidentally, on the subject of "rewards for failure", I bet Harriet isn't likely to renounce her own pension rights at the end of her lamentable career in the House of Commons; a pension to which taxpayers will have contributed roughly twice as much as the average private sector company contributes to their own employees' schemes.

Shut your noise, darlin' ! You might have aroused the Womble at around the time Mrs T was at the helm, but you're out of line on this one !

Jilted by...The Divine Harriet

As regular readers will know by now, I've got a bit of a thing about Harriet Harman. Nothing unhealthy or sinister, just a certain...attraction.

A few months ago, out of interest, I visited her blog, which is updated (very) sporadically, and has the (equally) occasional comment from readers. Quite understandably I guess, her blog does not immediately publish comments - they have to go through some approval process first. Without doubt this is to prevent embarrassing stuff being left on her blog by racists or lunatics. Or womanisers.

I left, in reaction to her article about a visit to Durham, a comment which, at the very worst, questioned (as opposed to criticised) her reference to the Migration Impact Forum. Imagine my devastation when, many months later, I return to find my comment unpublished, when many more sycophantic remarks in response to other articles seem to have made it through the filtering process.

"Never mind", I think to myself, maybe my comment's just been "lost in the post". Surely, as a defender of free debate, she couldn't censor her feedback so that it only includes the positive, could she ?

By way of experiment, I have left further comments on her two most recent articles. One comment is cynical and jaundiced, the other highly supportive.

I await with bated breath to see whether one, neither or both make it through to see the light of day.

An End To Self Service In The Commons ?

See ? I've always thought that The Divine Harriet was worth her place in government. Now she's about to prove it (I hope).

The Leader of the House has announced that the government is to launch a review of the way MPs' pay is determined. About time too.

Currently recommendations are made by the Senior Salaries Pay Board, but MPs get the final say - thereby being able to vote on the own pay. So, in the current pay round the Pay Board has recommended "inflation-busting" increases over the next three years, and actually the MPs are between a rock and a hard place; either they vote for the recommendations and get accused of feathering their own nests (and you'd never put it past them) or they reject them and undermine the process.

It's madness that we should let MPs decide how much of our money they get. Harriet appears to have seen the light.

Favourite picture time ? I'd have said so !

Go, Girl !

Good to see The Divine Harriet getting onto the front foot over the donations thing.

She's making it quite clear that it was Chris Leslie, Gordon Brown's campaign co-ordinator, who pointed her team in the direction of Janet Kidd, despite the fact that Brown's team has already rejected money from her.

After Brown's reluctance to show his full support of Harriet in his press conference earlier in the week, it's hard to dispel the image of a front-bench team that's at war with itself. Seems to me that if Harriet goes down, she's going do all she can to take Brown with her.

And if she manages that, I'd struggle to think of a Labour politician who had ever done the nation a greater service.

Wish I Could Go...

Hurray ! Harriet's In The News Again !

The Right are having a field day over Labour's donation travails.

This is a bit rich, really. I bet they're no better behaved; it's just that they haven't been caught yet.

They've already had the scalp of the General Secretary of the Labour Party, and now they're after my mate Harriet Harman. Apparently she accepted a £5,000 donation into her campaign for the deputy leadership, thinking it was from Janet Kidd when actually it originated from our old friend David Abrahams. She's going to pay the money back. Some people are calling for her to resign, but I reckon she should tell them all to bugger off.

I can't quite work out which Fantasy Government cock-up criterion this meets, or how many points it merits, but as I'm so hopelessly in love with her I can't resist the temptation to give her some (points, that is) and re-post my favourite photo of her.

Me, Harriet And Fixed-Term Governments

Harriet Harman was on Question Time last night telling us that the MSG is considering a move to fixed-term governments.

There's been a lot of talk about this in the last few days, and people from all three main parties are backing the idea.

I personally don't like it. I think it forces the government to manage the economy even more than they try to anyway - "We must make sure that we're spending loads of money by Point X because we know that's when the election has to be". I'd prefer to give them some flexibility to go to the polls when they want to. There's very little evidence to suggest that Prime Minsiters have, in the past, abused their consitutional right to call an election whenever they want (although admittedly Brown obviously considered it). And I don't buy the arguments about the uncertainty about timing being a bad thing, either.

But on the upside, it does give me an excuse to post a couple of pictures of my all-time favourite Labour politician (not that that's saying much). One thing is simply beyond argument - she's a good deal better-looking than her predecessor.

She can come and look at my swingometer any time.