House of Commons approves motion for 'Sir' Philip Green to be stripped of his knighthood. - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

House of Commons approves motion for 'Sir' Philip Green to be stripped of his knighthood.

£0.00 @
Which other Knights of the Realm and Peerage recipients, alive or dead, do you think should be dealt with in a similar manner - and why?.
Saturn Avatar
4m, 1d agoPosted 4 months, 1 day ago
Which other Knights of the Realm and Peerage recipients, alive or dead, do you think should be dealt with in a similar manner - and why?.
Saturn Avatar
4m, 1d agoPosted 4 months, 1 day ago
Options

Top Comments

(1)
5 Likes
meaningless motion, no teeth.

BTW Green has created more jobs and created more revenue than almost any politician.

Edited By: davewave on Oct 20, 2016 14:54

All Comments

(50) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
5 Likes #1
meaningless motion, no teeth.

BTW Green has created more jobs and created more revenue than almost any politician.

Edited By: davewave on Oct 20, 2016 14:54
suspended 1 Like #2
davewave
meaningless motion, no teeth.
BTW Green has created more jobs and created more revenue than almost any politician.

Knighthoods are a silly thing to be honest, but revoking them in this matter is perhaps the height of churlishness. It'll surely appease someone because that's why they're doing it, but whom I couldn't fathom.
3 Likes #3
Bring back the stocks and have him pelted with rotten eggs and tomatoes.
#4
davewave
meaningless motion, no teeth.
BTW Green has created more jobs and created more revenue than almost any politician.


True, no doubt, but then that wasn't the question. :)
banned 3 Likes #5
Being stripped of all his assets would be preferable.
#6
Saturn
davewave
meaningless motion, no teeth.
BTW Green has created more jobs and created more revenue than almost any politician.
True, no doubt, but then that wasn't the question. :)
but its the aim of these politicians. Let him without sin. Whats the question agian?
banned#7
He's a shameless imbecile who continues to live the highlife with his multi million pound yacht, on the backs of the countless he's made redundant and cheated from their pensions .
He should do the honorable thing by taking his yacht out to sea and jumping off it.
1 Like #8
WrongEnglishAndWelshDeals
davewave
meaningless motion, no teeth.
BTW Green has created more jobs and created more revenue than almost any politician.
Knighthoods are a silly thing to be honest, but revoking them in this matter is perhaps the height of churlishness. It'll surely appease someone because that's why they're doing it, but whom I couldn't fathom.

It's a highly symbolic act. Well done the House of Commons. It really doesn't surprise me that you don't get it.
#9
I think it will have a impact on him personally if it was revoked. The shame of having the knighthood revoked, so publicly will definitely upset him. Least that can be done really.

These super rich people love the prestige that a knighthood brings and we can't take his money but the knighthood should be.
1 Like #10
Bermudaboy
He's a shameless imbecile who continues to live the highlife with his multi million pound yacht, on the backs of the countless he's made redundant and cheated from their pensions .
He should do the honorable thing by taking his yacht out to sea and jumping off it.
Doing a maxwell? (_;)

Green is certainly every bit as unpleasant as the dud czech.
#11
Wasn't Fred Goodwin, former boss of RBS knighthood not revoked so publicly?

so a precedent has been set.
#12
Bermudaboy
He's a shameless imbecile who continues to live the highlife with his multi million pound yacht, on the backs of the countless he's made redundant and cheated from their pensions .
He should do the honorable thing by taking his yacht out to sea and jumping off it.
He is responsible for 45,000 employees - BHS wasnt a success but Dorothy Perkins, Burton, Top Shop are so I guess he is quite successful, relative to almost any retailer?!?

Lets take TopShop...300 stores across the UK, over 250,000 shoppers visiting Oxford Circus flagship every week, and over 140 stores in international territories.

Pray tell how much did you love shopping at BHS?
banned#13
davewave
Bermudaboy
He's a shameless imbecile who continues to live the highlife with his multi million pound yacht, on the backs of the countless he's made redundant and cheated from their pensions .
He should do the honorable thing by taking his yacht out to sea and jumping off it.
He is responsible for 45,000 employees - BHS wasnt a success but Dorothy Perkins, Burton, Top Shop are so I guess he is quite successful, relative to almost any retailer?!?
Lets take TopShop...300 stores across the UK, over 250,000 shoppers visiting Oxford Circus flagship every week, and over 140 stores in international territories.
Pray tell how much did you love shopping at BHS?

Hmmm I can't help wondering why you're so keen to defend this slimeball?
#14
Bermudaboy
davewave
Bermudaboy
He's a shameless imbecile who continues to live the highlife with his multi million pound yacht, on the backs of the countless he's made redundant and cheated from their pensions .
He should do the honorable thing by taking his yacht out to sea and jumping off it.
He is responsible for 45,000 employees - BHS wasnt a success but Dorothy Perkins, Burton, Top Shop are so I guess he is quite successful, relative to almost any retailer?!?
Lets take TopShop...300 stores across the UK, over 250,000 shoppers visiting Oxford Circus flagship every week, and over 140 stores in international territories.
Pray tell how much did you love shopping at BHS?
Hmmm I can't help wondering why you're so keen to defend this slimeball?
because he plowed hundreds of millions into BHS, it failed and although employing so many people and creating jobs via other successful brands, creating wealth and commerce, the MPs want to score points despite their inability to achieve even a fraction of this.
#15
davewave
Bermudaboy
He's a shameless imbecile who continues to live the highlife with his multi million pound yacht, on the backs of the countless he's made redundant and cheated from their pensions .
He should do the honorable thing by taking his yacht out to sea and jumping off it.
He is responsible for 45,000 employees - BHS wasnt a success but Dorothy Perkins, Burton, Top Shop are so I guess he is quite successful, relative to almost any retailer?!?
Lets take TopShop...300 stores across the UK, over 250,000 shoppers visiting Oxford Circus flagship every week, and over 140 stores in international territories.
Pray tell how much did you love shopping at BHS?
That was making him rich. What about the fact that there is a a massive pension deficit due to his mismanagement.

You make it seem like he was doing it all for charity (_;)
#16
davewave
Bermudaboy
davewave
Bermudaboy
He's a shameless imbecile who continues to live the highlife with his multi million pound yacht, on the backs of the countless he's made redundant and cheated from their pensions .
He should do the honorable thing by taking his yacht out to sea and jumping off it.
He is responsible for 45,000 employees - BHS wasnt a success but Dorothy Perkins, Burton, Top Shop are so I guess he is quite successful, relative to almost any retailer?!?
Lets take TopShop...300 stores across the UK, over 250,000 shoppers visiting Oxford Circus flagship every week, and over 140 stores in international territories.
Pray tell how much did you love shopping at BHS?
Hmmm I can't help wondering why you're so keen to defend this slimeball?
because he plowed hundreds of millions into BHS, it failed and although employing so many people and creating jobs via other successful brands, creating wealth and commerce, the MPs want to score points despite their inability to achieve even a fraction of this.
According to the Guardian, Green invested £421m and took out over £580m, coincidentally (?) roughly equivalent to the deficit in the BHS Pension Fund. I doubt whether you'd be very impressed with any politician who did that!
2 Likes #17
He buys a 100 million yacht but absolves himself of the mismanagement of the pension scheme in bhs?

Fred Goodwins knighthood was taken and so should Philip Greens.
banned 1 Like #18
Indefensible

If you can be bothered. Philip Green wasn't

Edited By: cchopps on Oct 20, 2016 16:56: edit
1 Like #19
This is what dave wave is defending:


The Labour MP Frank Field, chair of the work and pensions committee, accused the Topshop owner of being unwilling to part with a “modest” amount of his “mega fortune” to do his duty for the BHS pensioners. Field, who jointly led the parliamentary inquiry into the collapse of BHS, said that four months after Green had promised to sort out the pension fund there was still no current proposal on the table.

Questioning whether Green had been a deserving recipient of a knighthood, Field said: “There was nothing the committee could find that shows Sir Philip Green is the king of the high street. He was a very, very, successful asset stripper.” Green was honoured by the Blair government in 2006 for services to retailing.

Also speaking in parliament Iain Wright, who co-chaired the select committee investigation with Field as chair of the business, innovation and skills select committee, told MPs the failure of BHS was “one of the biggest corporate scandals of modern times”.

“Green took rings from BHS fingers, starved it of food and water, beat it black and blue and then wants credit for keeping it alive,” said Wright. He questioned whether the reputation of a retail Midas-figure led to his honour“Green wasn’t a short term corporate raider, but raid the company he did,” Wright added.
#20
The whole system of peerage and honours is ridiculous in itself and should be scrapped and is another symbolism of our class society that has no place in the world of today.

I doubt that Green will be the least bit concerned as he doesn't need to care about what anybody thinks.

Rather too many of these Knights of the realm that are eligible to, don't even turn up to sit in the House of Lords on a regular basis.

So many appointments are done for Political gain anyway, so further tarnishes the very word honour.
#21
EN1GMA
This is what dave wave is defending:


The Labour MP Frank Field, chair of the work and pensions committee, accused the Topshop owner of being unwilling to part with a “modest” amount of his “mega fortune” to do his duty for the BHS pensioners. Field, who jointly led the parliamentary inquiry into the collapse of BHS, said that four months after Green had promised to sort out the pension fund there was still no current proposal on the table.

Questioning whether Green had been a deserving recipient of a knighthood, Field said: “There was nothing the committee could find that shows Sir Philip Green is the king of the high street. He was a very, very, successful asset stripper.” Green was honoured by the Blair government in 2006 for services to retailing.

Also speaking in parliament Iain Wright, who co-chaired the select committee investigation with Field as chair of the business, innovation and skills select committee, told MPs the failure of BHS was “one of the biggest corporate scandals of modern times”.

“Green took rings from BHS fingers, starved it of food and water, beat it black and blue and then wants credit for keeping it alive,” said Wright. He questioned whether the reputation of a retail Midas-figure led to his honour“Green wasn’t a short term corporate raider, but raid the company he did,” Wright added.


​Only count the failure not his successes and the blatant political points being won by class war politicians who don't like wealth.

Since when was 100's of millions of pounds a 'modest' amount that there was no legal requirement for him to pay?

Would you pay even a much smaller amount, let's say thousands of pounds from your hard earned cash to settle a political score for some jumped up politician who has never done a real days work?
#22
Taking the knighthood off him will seriously damage his ego. Good enough for him.
#23
ajak
Taking the knighthood off him will seriously damage his ego. Good enough for him.


​the motion is toothless politicking.
#24
davewave
EN1GMA
This is what dave wave is defending:
The Labour MP Frank Field, chair of the work and pensions committee, accused the Topshop owner of being unwilling to part with a “modest” amount of his “mega fortune” to do his duty for the BHS pensioners. Field, who jointly led the parliamentary inquiry into the collapse of BHS, said that four months after Green had promised to sort out the pension fund there was still no current proposal on the table.
Questioning whether Green had been a deserving recipient of a knighthood, Field said: “There was nothing the committee could find that shows Sir Philip Green is the king of the high street. He was a very, very, successful asset stripper.” Green was honoured by the Blair government in 2006 for services to retailing.
Also speaking in parliament Iain Wright, who co-chaired the select committee investigation with Field as chair of the business, innovation and skills select committee, told MPs the failure of BHS was “one of the biggest corporate scandals of modern times”.
“Green took rings from BHS fingers, starved it of food and water, beat it black and blue and then wants credit for keeping it alive,” said Wright. He questioned whether the reputation of a retail Midas-figure led to his honour“Green wasn’t a short term corporate raider, but raid the company he did,” Wright added.
​Only count the failure not his successes and the blatant political points being won by class war politicians who don't like wealth.
Since when was 100's of millions of pounds a 'modest' amount that there was no legal requirement for him to pay?
Would you pay even a much smaller amount, let's say thousands of pounds from your hard earned cash to settle a political score for some jumped up politician who has never done a real days work?
But he hasn't paid any of his own money back into BHS, merely returned some of the money that he had somehow managed to extract from a non-profit making business.

The most likely reason for him paying anything (his money or not) back is because he doesn't want the government to start looking at what happened to BHS while he was running the business. Surely, someone should be asking how he managed to run the pension fund down whilst paying out £580m to himself and his family companies?
#25
davewave
EN1GMA
This is what dave wave is defending:
The Labour MP Frank Field, chair of the work and pensions committee, accused the Topshop owner of being unwilling to part with a “modest” amount of his “mega fortune” to do his duty for the BHS pensioners. Field, who jointly led the parliamentary inquiry into the collapse of BHS, said that four months after Green had promised to sort out the pension fund there was still no current proposal on the table.
Questioning whether Green had been a deserving recipient of a knighthood, Field said: “There was nothing the committee could find that shows Sir Philip Green is the king of the high street. He was a very, very, successful asset stripper.” Green was honoured by the Blair government in 2006 for services to retailing.
Also speaking in parliament Iain Wright, who co-chaired the select committee investigation with Field as chair of the business, innovation and skills select committee, told MPs the failure of BHS was “one of the biggest corporate scandals of modern times”.
“Green took rings from BHS fingers, starved it of food and water, beat it black and blue and then wants credit for keeping it alive,” said Wright. He questioned whether the reputation of a retail Midas-figure led to his honour“Green wasn’t a short term corporate raider, but raid the company he did,” Wright added.
​Only count the failure not his successes and the blatant political points being won by class war politicians who don't like wealth.
Since when was 100's of millions of pounds a 'modest' amount that there was no legal requirement for him to pay?
Would you pay even a much smaller amount, let's say thousands of pounds from your hard earned cash to settle a political score for some jumped up politician who has never done a real days work?
Bringing what politicians do in this issue is whataboutery. This is about Philip Green and his unscrupulous practice in bleeding bhs dry and putting the future of 11,000 former bhs staff future at risk. People worked their for years, paid into a pension hoping for it in retirement and now gone due to the greed of Mr Green.

The fact you are defending him is shocking. Do you know him or something?
#26
davewave
EN1GMA
This is what dave wave is defending:


The Labour MP Frank Field, chair of the work and pensions committee, accused the Topshop owner of being unwilling to part with a “modest” amount of his “mega fortune” to do his duty for the BHS pensioners. Field, who jointly led the parliamentary inquiry into the collapse of BHS, said that four months after Green had promised to sort out the pension fund there was still no current proposal on the table.

Questioning whether Green had been a deserving recipient of a knighthood, Field said: “There was nothing the committee could find that shows Sir Philip Green is the king of the high street. He was a very, very, successful asset stripper.” Green was honoured by the Blair government in 2006 for services to retailing.

Also speaking in parliament Iain Wright, who co-chaired the select committee investigation with Field as chair of the business, innovation and skills select committee, told MPs the failure of BHS was “one of the biggest corporate scandals of modern times”.

“Green took rings from BHS fingers, starved it of food and water, beat it black and blue and then wants credit for keeping it alive,” said Wright. He questioned whether the reputation of a retail Midas-figure led to his honour“Green wasn’t a short term corporate raider, but raid the company he did,” Wright added.

​Only count the failure not his successes and the blatant political points being won by class war politicians who don't like wealth.

Since when was 100's of millions of pounds a 'modest' amount that there was no legal requirement for him to pay?

Would you pay even a much smaller amount, let's say thousands of pounds from your hard earned cash to settle a political score for some jumped up politician who has never done a real days work?
The failure is 11,000 people out of a job and plus putting their pensions at risk, thus affecting their very future.

Yet you are defending him.
#27
EN1GMA
davewave
EN1GMA
This is what dave wave is defending:


The Labour MP Frank Field, chair of the work and pensions committee, accused the Topshop owner of being unwilling to part with a “modest” amount of his “mega fortune” to do his duty for the BHS pensioners. Field, who jointly led the parliamentary inquiry into the collapse of BHS, said that four months after Green had promised to sort out the pension fund there was still no current proposal on the table.

Questioning whether Green had been a deserving recipient of a knighthood, Field said: “There was nothing the committee could find that shows Sir Philip Green is the king of the high street. He was a very, very, successful asset stripper.” Green was honoured by the Blair government in 2006 for services to retailing.

Also speaking in parliament Iain Wright, who co-chaired the select committee investigation with Field as chair of the business, innovation and skills select committee, told MPs the failure of BHS was “one of the biggest corporate scandals of modern times”.

“Green took rings from BHS fingers, starved it of food and water, beat it black and blue and then wants credit for keeping it alive,” said Wright. He questioned whether the reputation of a retail Midas-figure led to his honour“Green wasn’t a short term corporate raider, but raid the company he did,” Wright added.

​Only count the failure not his successes and the blatant political points being won by class war politicians who don't like wealth.

Since when was 100's of millions of pounds a 'modest' amount that there was no legal requirement for him to pay?

Would you pay even a much smaller amount, let's say thousands of pounds from your hard earned cash to settle a political score for some jumped up politician who has never done a real days work?
The failure is 11,000 people out of a job and plus putting their pensions at risk, thus affecting their very future.

Yet you are defending him.


​and BHS failed, not the only shop to have failed after a market transition to online retailing. you realise he employs 45000 other people?

ever worked for a rubbish firm guess you didnt expect them to succeed, jobs for life and secure pensions only for successful firms and public sector.
#28
davewave
EN1GMA
davewave
EN1GMA
This is what dave wave is defending:
The Labour MP Frank Field, chair of the work and pensions committee, accused the Topshop owner of being unwilling to part with a “modest” amount of his “mega fortune” to do his duty for the BHS pensioners. Field, who jointly led the parliamentary inquiry into the collapse of BHS, said that four months after Green had promised to sort out the pension fund there was still no current proposal on the table.
Questioning whether Green had been a deserving recipient of a knighthood, Field said: “There was nothing the committee could find that shows Sir Philip Green is the king of the high street. He was a very, very, successful asset stripper.” Green was honoured by the Blair government in 2006 for services to retailing.
Also speaking in parliament Iain Wright, who co-chaired the select committee investigation with Field as chair of the business, innovation and skills select committee, told MPs the failure of BHS was “one of the biggest corporate scandals of modern times”.
“Green took rings from BHS fingers, starved it of food and water, beat it black and blue and then wants credit for keeping it alive,” said Wright. He questioned whether the reputation of a retail Midas-figure led to his honour“Green wasn’t a short term corporate raider, but raid the company he did,” Wright added.
​Only count the failure not his successes and the blatant political points being won by class war politicians who don't like wealth.
Since when was 100's of millions of pounds a 'modest' amount that there was no legal requirement for him to pay?
Would you pay even a much smaller amount, let's say thousands of pounds from your hard earned cash to settle a political score for some jumped up politician who has never done a real days work?
The failure is 11,000 people out of a job and plus putting their pensions at risk, thus affecting their very future.
Yet you are defending him.
​and BHS failed, not the only shop to have failed after a market transition to online retailing. you realise he employs 45000 other people?
ever worked for a rubbish firm guess you didnt expect them to succeed, jobs for life and secure pensions only for successful firms and public sector.
Market transition to online? You must know the guy because you're defending the undefensible.
#29
RonChew
davewave
EN1GMA
This is what dave wave is defending:
The Labour MP Frank Field, chair of the work and pensions committee, accused the Topshop owner of being unwilling to part with a “modest” amount of his “mega fortune” to do his duty for the BHS pensioners. Field, who jointly led the parliamentary inquiry into the collapse of BHS, said that four months after Green had promised to sort out the pension fund there was still no current proposal on the table.
Questioning whether Green had been a deserving recipient of a knighthood, Field said: “There was nothing the committee could find that shows Sir Philip Green is the king of the high street. He was a very, very, successful asset stripper.” Green was honoured by the Blair government in 2006 for services to retailing.
Also speaking in parliament Iain Wright, who co-chaired the select committee investigation with Field as chair of the business, innovation and skills select committee, told MPs the failure of BHS was “one of the biggest corporate scandals of modern times”.
“Green took rings from BHS fingers, starved it of food and water, beat it black and blue and then wants credit for keeping it alive,” said Wright. He questioned whether the reputation of a retail Midas-figure led to his honour“Green wasn’t a short term corporate raider, but raid the company he did,” Wright added.
​Only count the failure not his successes and the blatant political points being won by class war politicians who don't like wealth.
Since when was 100's of millions of pounds a 'modest' amount that there was no legal requirement for him to pay?
Would you pay even a much smaller amount, let's say thousands of pounds from your hard earned cash to settle a political score for some jumped up politician who has never done a real days work?
But he hasn't paid any of his own money back into BHS, merely returned some of the money that he had somehow managed to extract from a non-profit making business.
The most likely reason for him paying anything (his money or not) back is because he doesn't want the government to start looking at what happened to BHS while he was running the business. Surely, someone should be asking how he managed to run the pension fund down whilst paying out £580m to himself and his family companies?

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Sorry - had a bit of a New Labour turn there.
#30
3guesses
RonChew
davewave
EN1GMA
This is what dave wave is defending:
The Labour MP Frank Field, chair of the work and pensions committee, accused the Topshop owner of being unwilling to part with a “modest” amount of his “mega fortune” to do his duty for the BHS pensioners. Field, who jointly led the parliamentary inquiry into the collapse of BHS, said that four months after Green had promised to sort out the pension fund there was still no current proposal on the table.
Questioning whether Green had been a deserving recipient of a knighthood, Field said: “There was nothing the committee could find that shows Sir Philip Green is the king of the high street. He was a very, very, successful asset stripper.” Green was honoured by the Blair government in 2006 for services to retailing.
Also speaking in parliament Iain Wright, who co-chaired the select committee investigation with Field as chair of the business, innovation and skills select committee, told MPs the failure of BHS was “one of the biggest corporate scandals of modern times”.
“Green took rings from BHS fingers, starved it of food and water, beat it black and blue and then wants credit for keeping it alive,” said Wright. He questioned whether the reputation of a retail Midas-figure led to his honour“Green wasn’t a short term corporate raider, but raid the company he did,” Wright added.
​Only count the failure not his successes and the blatant political points being won by class war politicians who don't like wealth.
Since when was 100's of millions of pounds a 'modest' amount that there was no legal requirement for him to pay?
Would you pay even a much smaller amount, let's say thousands of pounds from your hard earned cash to settle a political score for some jumped up politician who has never done a real days work?
But he hasn't paid any of his own money back into BHS, merely returned some of the money that he had somehow managed to extract from a non-profit making business.
The most likely reason for him paying anything (his money or not) back is because he doesn't want the government to start looking at what happened to BHS while he was running the business. Surely, someone should be asking how he managed to run the pension fund down whilst paying out £580m to himself and his family companies?
You say that like it's a bad thing.
Sorry - had a bit of a New Labour turn there.
Although this is likely to stir up something of a hornet's nest, I do find it rather odd that Labour elevated two prominent Jewish businessmen (Green and Sugar), both of whom have led somewhat chequered business lives, to the peerage yet the party is now being accused of deep rooted anti-semitism. Funny old world, isn't it. (_;)
1 Like #31
£600,000,000 pension deficit how does that happen unless someone hasnt done there job right or had their fingers in the till, the pensions should of been invested and protected. everyone involved should of been prosecuted, i find it hilarious this country can prosecute and jail someone for stealing food to feed their family (prob a BHS ex employee) yet someone takes 580mil out of a business and they barely get investigated.
#32
RonChew
3guesses
RonChew
davewave
EN1GMA
This is what dave wave is defending:
The Labour MP Frank Field, chair of the work and pensions committee, accused the Topshop owner of being unwilling to part with a “modest” amount of his “mega fortune” to do his duty for the BHS pensioners. Field, who jointly led the parliamentary inquiry into the collapse of BHS, said that four months after Green had promised to sort out the pension fund there was still no current proposal on the table.
Questioning whether Green had been a deserving recipient of a knighthood, Field said: “There was nothing the committee could find that shows Sir Philip Green is the king of the high street. He was a very, very, successful asset stripper.” Green was honoured by the Blair government in 2006 for services to retailing.
Also speaking in parliament Iain Wright, who co-chaired the select committee investigation with Field as chair of the business, innovation and skills select committee, told MPs the failure of BHS was “one of the biggest corporate scandals of modern times”.
“Green took rings from BHS fingers, starved it of food and water, beat it black and blue and then wants credit for keeping it alive,” said Wright. He questioned whether the reputation of a retail Midas-figure led to his honour“Green wasn’t a short term corporate raider, but raid the company he did,” Wright added.
​Only count the failure not his successes and the blatant political points being won by class war politicians who don't like wealth.
Since when was 100's of millions of pounds a 'modest' amount that there was no legal requirement for him to pay?
Would you pay even a much smaller amount, let's say thousands of pounds from your hard earned cash to settle a political score for some jumped up politician who has never done a real days work?
But he hasn't paid any of his own money back into BHS, merely returned some of the money that he had somehow managed to extract from a non-profit making business.
The most likely reason for him paying anything (his money or not) back is because he doesn't want the government to start looking at what happened to BHS while he was running the business. Surely, someone should be asking how he managed to run the pension fund down whilst paying out £580m to himself and his family companies?
You say that like it's a bad thing.
Sorry - had a bit of a New Labour turn there.
Although this is likely to stir up something of a hornet's nest, I do find it rather odd that Labour elevated two prominent Jewish businessmen (Green and Sugar), both of whom have led somewhat chequered business lives, to the peerage yet the party is now being accused of deep rooted anti-semitism. Funny old world, isn't it. (_;)

Tory propaganda smacking us right in the face there...
1 Like #33
haritori
£600,000,000 pension deficit how does that happen unless someone hasnt done there job right or had their fingers in the till, the pensions should of been invested and protected. everyone involved should of been prosecuted, i find it hilarious this country can prosecute and jail someone for stealing food to feed their family (prob a BHS ex employee) yet someone takes 580mil out of a business and they barely get investigated.

Ah, gotta love capitalism.
#34
davewave
meaningless motion, no teeth.
BTW Green has created more jobs and created more revenue than almost any politician.

Yeah

& he has "taken" ( ;) ) more money than any politician. In fact he has probably "taken" more money that all of the members of commons put together....
#35
davewave
EN1GMA
davewave
EN1GMA
This is what dave wave is defending:
The Labour MP Frank Field, chair of the work and pensions committee, accused the Topshop owner of being unwilling to part with a “modest” amount of his “mega fortune” to do his duty for the BHS pensioners. Field, who jointly led the parliamentary inquiry into the collapse of BHS, said that four months after Green had promised to sort out the pension fund there was still no current proposal on the table.
Questioning whether Green had been a deserving recipient of a knighthood, Field said: “There was nothing the committee could find that shows Sir Philip Green is the king of the high street. He was a very, very, successful asset stripper.” Green was honoured by the Blair government in 2006 for services to retailing.
Also speaking in parliament Iain Wright, who co-chaired the select committee investigation with Field as chair of the business, innovation and skills select committee, told MPs the failure of BHS was “one of the biggest corporate scandals of modern times”.
“Green took rings from BHS fingers, starved it of food and water, beat it black and blue and then wants credit for keeping it alive,” said Wright. He questioned whether the reputation of a retail Midas-figure led to his honour“Green wasn’t a short term corporate raider, but raid the company he did,” Wright added.
​Only count the failure not his successes and the blatant political points being won by class war politicians who don't like wealth.
Since when was 100's of millions of pounds a 'modest' amount that there was no legal requirement for him to pay?
Would you pay even a much smaller amount, let's say thousands of pounds from your hard earned cash to settle a political score for some jumped up politician who has never done a real days work?
The failure is 11,000 people out of a job and plus putting their pensions at risk, thus affecting their very future.
Yet you are defending him.
​and BHS failed, not the only shop to have failed after a market transition to online retailing. you realise he employs 45000 other people?
ever worked for a rubbish firm guess you didnt expect them to succeed, jobs for life and secure pensions only for successful firms and public sector.

Not being funny Dave but support of Philip Green is virtually zero in the whole country. It is on a par with Fred Goodwin.

Is there any particular reason you support his actions of defrauding his staff of their pensions?

I know you have at least one thing in common with Philip Green & really hope your support of the man has nothing to do with that!!
#36
haritori
£600,000,000 pension deficit how does that happen unless someone hasnt done there job right or had their fingers in the till, the pensions should of been invested and protected. everyone involved should of been prosecuted, i find it hilarious this country can prosecute and jail someone for stealing food to feed their family (prob a BHS ex employee) yet someone takes 580mil out of a business and they barely get investigated.
Part of the problem is that it is much easier to prove extractive fraud (taking something to which you are not entitled) than it is to prove non-extractive fraud (not paying something that you should have paid).

So, generally, the authorities will settle non-extractive fraud by accepting a payment and extractive fraud by prosecuting the fraudster.

NB - this is a very simplistic explanation!
1 Like #37
YouDontWantToKnow
I know you have at least one thing in common with Philip Green & really hope your support of the man has nothing to do with that!!
Is our dave a peer of the realm? oO
#38
RonChew
3guesses
RonChew
davewave
EN1GMA
This is what dave wave is defending:
The Labour MP Frank Field, chair of the work and pensions committee, accused the Topshop owner of being unwilling to part with a “modest” amount of his “mega fortune” to do his duty for the BHS pensioners. Field, who jointly led the parliamentary inquiry into the collapse of BHS, said that four months after Green had promised to sort out the pension fund there was still no current proposal on the table.
Questioning whether Green had been a deserving recipient of a knighthood, Field said: “There was nothing the committee could find that shows Sir Philip Green is the king of the high street. He was a very, very, successful asset stripper.” Green was honoured by the Blair government in 2006 for services to retailing.
Also speaking in parliament Iain Wright, who co-chaired the select committee investigation with Field as chair of the business, innovation and skills select committee, told MPs the failure of BHS was “one of the biggest corporate scandals of modern times”.
“Green took rings from BHS fingers, starved it of food and water, beat it black and blue and then wants credit for keeping it alive,” said Wright. He questioned whether the reputation of a retail Midas-figure led to his honour“Green wasn’t a short term corporate raider, but raid the company he did,” Wright added.
​Only count the failure not his successes and the blatant political points being won by class war politicians who don't like wealth.
Since when was 100's of millions of pounds a 'modest' amount that there was no legal requirement for him to pay?
Would you pay even a much smaller amount, let's say thousands of pounds from your hard earned cash to settle a political score for some jumped up politician who has never done a real days work?
But he hasn't paid any of his own money back into BHS, merely returned some of the money that he had somehow managed to extract from a non-profit making business.
The most likely reason for him paying anything (his money or not) back is because he doesn't want the government to start looking at what happened to BHS while he was running the business. Surely, someone should be asking how he managed to run the pension fund down whilst paying out £580m to himself and his family companies?
You say that like it's a bad thing.
Sorry - had a bit of a New Labour turn there.
Although this is likely to stir up something of a hornet's nest, I do find it rather odd that Labour elevated two prominent Jewish businessmen (Green and Sugar), both of whom have led somewhat chequered business lives, to the peerage yet the party is now being accused of deep rooted anti-semitism. Funny old world, isn't it. (_;)


​you would mate. perhaps being a successful billionaire isn't enough.
#39
YouDontWantToKnow
davewave
meaningless motion, no teeth.
BTW Green has created more jobs and created more revenue than almost any politician.

Yeah

& he has "taken" ( ;) ) more money than any politician. In fact he has probably "taken" more money that all of the members of commons put together....


​he isn't a politician and he hasn't taken money, this isn't a corner shop with one till, a complex number of business like any large corporate. oversimplifying the situation will draw the wrong conclusion.
#40
davewave
YouDontWantToKnow
davewave
meaningless motion, no teeth.
BTW Green has created more jobs and created more revenue than almost any politician.
Yeah
& he has "taken" ( ;) ) more money than any politician. In fact he has probably "taken" more money that all of the members of commons put together....
​he isn't a politician and he hasn't taken money, this isn't a corner shop with one till, a complex number of business like any large corporate. oversimplifying the situation will draw the wrong conclusion.

Dave. He robbed the employees money by the hundreds of millions.

Why would you support someone like that? I can only think of one reason.

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Looking for Twitter login?
Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!