PMQs 1 April 2009 - Another Brownie?

Per Hansard here is a question and answer:

"Mr. Garnier: The Prime Minister and his noble Friend Lord Myners have now had 24 hours to consider whether they can confirm what Lord Myners said to the Treasury Committee about Sir Fred Goodwin’s pension arrangements. Does the Prime Minister understand that his Ministers are now held in public ridicule and contempt, and is it not time that at least one of them resigned?

The Prime Minister: I see that the hon. and learned Gentleman has risen to the occasion today. Lord Myners has made it very clear that he was told of something that he was led to believe was a contractual obligation but was a discretionary matter. That is the issue that UK Financial Investments Ltd is taking up with the Royal Bank of Scotland; that is the basis on which we are considering legal action; and that is the basis on which UKFI will use its votes in the annual general meeting to promote legal action."

I'll repeat the key part of Gordon Brown's answer "Lord Myners has made it very clear that he was told of something that he was led to believe was a contractual obligation but was a discretionary matter." I have added "in fact" where I presume Gordon Brown would have put it were he not all but incapable


The FT's report from 26 February

quotes Lord Myners as saying "As I have already made clear, it was only last week that the Government became aware that the decision of the previous Board of RBS may have been a discretionary choice."

Meanwhile The Guardian amongst others has reported that Sir Tom McKillop, the former chairman of the Royal Bank of Scotland, has issued a point-by-point rebuttal of his account of Sir Fred Goodwin's £703,000 annual pension including this statement

"Yesterday McKillop insisted that the bank felt "contractually bound" to pay the pension to Goodwin. "There was no question of any discretion to be exercised in relation to Sir Fred's pension and no discretion was exercised in this regard by any RBS director," McKillop said.

He insisted that at no point did Myners or any other government representative try to alter "any of the contractual terms relating to Sir Fred's pensions". He said Myners had been told the pension would be "enormous" and that Bob Scott, who ran the bank's remuneration committee, had told the minister on 12 October that the pot would be £15m-£20m."

I wonder where the truth lies...