Transcript of Government Debate on Sir Fred Goodwin

March 18, 2009

harman-vest.jpg

New revelations about Sir Fred Goodwin prompt top-level discussions among the people at the top. Luckily, Swordplay has a mole at the heart of the government. Here’s what he heard…

The Rt Hon Harriet Harman: I’m sorry I’m late. I was driving as fast as I could but the blasted police stopped me. However, I asked the constable who issued me with a fixed penalty ticket what he thought about Sir Fred. He said we should sue him for every penny he’s got. Then he said: “That’ll be £60 and three points, ma’am.”

Gordon Brown: Is there any way we can claw back that £60? I don’t think the public will like this sort of thing at all. It’s bad for public relations, you know.

Harman: I agree. It’s an outrage! And while we’re at it, why don’t we sue Sir Fred for everything he’s got?

Lord Myners: Everything? With respect, Ms Hardline, as a solicitor you surely know that suing someone for everything is somewhat extreme, especially when there’s no cause of action?

Brown: It’s this £60 that I’m worried about. Where I come from, if you look after the pennies, the £16.9 million pension pots look after themselves.

Harman: Sue Sir Fred for everything! Sue Sir Fred for everything!

Myners: Ms Hardperson, is that a kelvar-reinforced stab vest under your blouse, or are you just unusually exercised by the £60?

Brown: I’ll have you know that if the Rt Hon lady is exercised by the £60, she has every right to be. What I’m wondering, in what I admit is illustrative of the clever lateral thinking for which I am renowned, is whether RBS might cover it?

Myners: An excellent idea, your excellency. I will call and ask them.

Silence as Lord Myners telephones the CEO of RBS. He talks quietly into the phone for a few minutes.

Brown: Well? What did he say about my cunning plan to save the world from the global downturn?

Myners: He says RBS will cover £30 but that they’re a bit strapped at the moment.

Harman: Let’s sue them for everything they’ve got!

Myners: Ms Hard, they haven’t got anything. It would be pointless suing them.

Brown (to himself): Hmm, this is a challenge. My plan has almost worked, but not quite.

They lapse into silence. Just then the phone goes. The Rt Hon Harriet Harman answers and puts it on speaker-phone.

Harman: Hello?

Sir Fred Goodwin (for it is he):  I can lend you £30 if you’re in a bit of a jam.

Myners: That’s very kind but you really don’t have to. We’ll ask the taxpayer.

Brown: Where I come from, if you look after the pennies, the £1.8 million tax bills look after themselves. I should hang on to that £30 if I were you, but thanks for the call.

Sir Fred: So that’s it?

Brown: Yes.

Sir Fred: But am I still “disgraced banker” Sir Fred Goodwin in all media?

Brown: I’m afraid so. Goodbye.

Sir Fred hangs up.

Harman: So shall we sue him for everything he’s got?

Brown: Not everything – that would be a mistake. The public might think that we have over-reacted. No, I have a better idea. It’s rather cute, if I say so myself.

Myners: You’re not thinking of the ultimate sanction?

Harman: My God!

Brown (triumphantly): Yes! We will print some new money, give it to the RBS, and get them to give it back to us! Why, we’ll sue them if we have to!

Harman: For everything they’ve got!

Myners: Ms Hardline, please, we’re talking about £30.

Brown: Good, so we’re all agreed. Let’s let moving on this as soon as possible.

Harman: I’ll drive!

They exit and within minutes the Rt Hon Harriet Harman is behind the wheel, with Brown and Myners on the rear seat scrutinising top-level papers, top-level style. She speeds to the Royal Mint, for not a moment is to be lost. Unfortunately, before she can get there, she is stopped for speeding. The Prime Minister orders the car back to HQ, muttering that “It wasn’t like this in my day. Back then the pennies looked after themselves. Where did it all go wrong? Perhaps my American friend, Mr Barack, has an idea.” But back in Whitehall, no one has ever heard of Mr Barack. Exasperated, the Prime Minster convenes another top-level meeting.

Brown: What can I do? It’s all going so horribly wrong! The only person the blasted civil servants have ever heard of is Sir Fred Goodwin.  No one seems to know of Mr Barack and yet I’m pretty sure he’s the leader of the free world.

Myners: He must have a few quid.

Brown: Exactly! £30 would be a drop in the ocean for someone like him.

Harman: Why don’t we sue him?

Myners: For everything he’s got?

Brown: Idiots! How can we sue him if we don’t know who he is?!

Harman and Myners (as one): Yes, Prime Minister.

 

Comments

Please submit comments to Swordplay below.

If you’re Joey Barton, attack is not the best form of defence

May 17, 2012

Interesting times, these, in the life of Joey Barton.

If the violence displayed by the QPR captain at Manchester City last Sunday was remarkable, his subsequent conduct on Twitter has been astonishing. Barton appears to have radically reinterpreted the notion that attack is the best form of defence, lashing out at all and sundry via a series of tweets whose ultimate effect is entirely self-destructive.

In the past 24 hours, Barton has accepted one charge of violent conduct at the Etihad Stadium but denied another. The FA seems set to throw the book at him, and his club has declared that it will deal with the matter after the result of the FA investigation. Conspiracy theorists might conclude that QPR’s management team and board hope that the FA ban Barton for so long a period (four months and more) that their reported desire to rip up his contract can only be bolstered.

What, then, should Barton do? Should he:

(a) Keep his head down and say nothing, or

(b) Issue a sensible statement in which he acknowledges that both his conduct at the Etihad and subsequent tweets have brought QPR into disrepute, and

(c) Add an apology to said statement, or

(d) Go to Portugal, log onto Twitter and tweet that the world is against him but that he doesn’t care because everyone is a moron and he’s worked really hard to get where he is and if anyone is nasty to him again he is going to expose their secrets.

The answer is not (d).

The moral of the story is that if you’re a loose cannon, when you turn attack into defence there is a danger that you will blow yourself up.

Gunning foglessly for clarity

May 15, 2012

A fine piece, this, on Winston Churchill’s gift for language and the obscurantism that goes with so much corporate communication.

But wait, what’s this? Could this injunction have been phrased rather more successfully:

Be concrete, not abstract. Use metaphors to get your message across.

Metaphors are, by definition, not exactly concrete. But be that as it may: there is a lot of sound advice in Clare Lynch’s piece and a revelation, too. We had never heard of the Gunning Fog Index.  But it exists, and reveals the age at which someone would have to leave full-time education to understand given text.

We’re pleased to display our own Gunning Fog rating for the above words. That of the Churchill speech cited by Ms Lynch was 9.698.

The Gunning Fog index is 9.585

Spin at the Leveson Inquiry

May 9, 2012
Leveson witch hunt

The idea that Lord Justice Leveson and his Inquiry’s QC, Robert Jay, are in need of PR advice is intriguing.

Surely their respective tasks ought to be immune from spin? Then again, perhaps the way in which they execute them is deserving of some communications advice. Either way, times have changed. A similar inquiry from yesteryear (and such do exist) would surely not have been accompanied, albeit informally, by communications advice.

Pictured courtesy of this Flickr user: a portrait of the Leveson Inquiry.