So Fred Goodwin\’s superinjunction has been lifted.
It is now permissible therefore to say what part of all the fuss was about.
Allegedly, and I have only heard this said, I have no evidence one way or another, Sir Fred was banging one of the birds on the risk management team.
I\’ve heard it said that she enjoyed a \”meteoric career\”.
So far, so ho hum. Alpha males, even if they are accountants, have been known to make pretty with the female staff and female staff have been known to, entirely of their own accord, be willing to make the two backed beast with alpha males: even accountants. Promotions have happened as a result of such bedroom games.
While it\’s interesting to the public that this was going on, for the public is interested in such news, it\’s not particularly in the public interest. It\’s entirely possible that the privacy rights of two consenting adults come before the hoi polloi\’s interest in Tab A being used in Slot A, B or C.
However, where it all becomes rather murkier is that risk management was the one great big stonking failure at RBS. Arrogant and over-bearing chief executives are supposed to be brought to heel by the risk management department. That\’s what they\’re for.
But, of course, if part of the senior management of the bank calls the chief exec \”sweetie pie\” (or even, painful though it is to think of an accountant in this manner, \”Big Boy! Yes! Yes! There!\”) some of the time and \”Are you quite certain about the risk profile Sir Fred?\” at others, then it\’s possible that the risk management of the bank wasn\’t being quite all that it could be.
To put it another way. Sir Fred was indeed hubristic. He certainly needed to be constrained by the risk management department. But if, purely as an example of what most certainly didn\’t happen, he installed his mistress as the person supposed to restrain him*, that would be in the public interest, wouldn\’t it?
* Yes, I know, Fnarr, Fnarr.