Gransnet forums


Philip green

(49 Posts)
Morgana Tue 28-Feb-17 22:55:41

am I being unreasonable to object to the way that the BBC reported the news that this despicable man has magnanimously agreed to give some if his vast 'looted' wealth to give his former workers pensions?

NfkDumpling Tue 28-Feb-17 23:04:39

No, I agree!

Jomarie Tue 28-Feb-17 23:08:08

Me too!

Christinefrance Wed 01-Mar-17 08:00:28

Too little too late but it will bring some relief to BHS workers. He is a horrible man and not worthy of his knighthood.

M0nica Wed 01-Mar-17 19:11:18

At least we now the price of a knighthood: £300 and something million £s.

Deedaa Wed 01-Mar-17 22:13:58

Yes, so much for not being able to buy one!

Jalima Wed 01-Mar-17 23:11:42

The pensioners have still been short-changed.

He should either cough up the rest (pocket money to him) or forfeit his knighthood.
Then Mrs G should be forced to pay a few hundred million £ to HMRC or they should both be charged with fraud and put inside for a very long time.

vampirequeen Thu 02-Mar-17 09:37:18

It's still a couple of hundred million pounds short. He wouldn't miss it but hey why take money of the rich when you can just take it from the poor NHS pensioners.

Even if he'd paid the whole lot back he should still have lost his knighthood. He's a crook.

GracesGranMK2 Thu 02-Mar-17 10:54:41

Let them know. If everyone who objects emails them they will at least have to think about what they are saying.

kathcraigs Thu 02-Mar-17 10:59:42

Not unreasonable at all. The BBC are increasingly biased to the point of propaganda.
l don't know if emails will make any difference, unfortunately. Myself and a lot of people complained vociferously about the way something as reported last year, and all l got back was a condescending, standard reply.

Jaycee5 Thu 02-Mar-17 11:00:21

BBC news is very second rate. They always say things 'like a government think tank says...' as if they are stating facts rather than opinions and never say who or who organisations are behind the think tanks.
If you watch a site like RT (and ignore the obvious bias about issues like the Ukraine) their presenters obviously do their own research and know the subject in detail. On the BBC they are just autocue reading bimbos (male and female).

Yorkshiregel Thu 02-Mar-17 11:05:33

I think the BBC are biased anyway. They push what the Government want them to push.

I don't know why we have to suffer 3 or 4 presenters sitting round a table chatting in a morning. All I want to hear is what is happening in the world, not stuff about someone's latest film or book.

Why can't we go back to just one presenter? That would save money that could be spent on better reporting.

I do not think you are unreasonable Morgana. I think you are spot on.

Yorkshiregel Thu 02-Mar-17 11:09:22

Daily politics is increasingly getting to be the tool the Government use to push their agenda too. As for the female presenter, she just likes the sound of her own voice. Why do they invite guests on when they both talk over what they say?

I am sick of them having a go at Corbyn, he seems to come up on every programme one way or another, and I did not vote Labour! Also I am keeping my fingers crossed that when BREXIT happens (been delayed by the Lords now) they might just shut up about that too.

Yorkshiregel Thu 02-Mar-17 11:10:50

GracesGranMK2 I do email them, so much so that I can just hear them saying 'Oh no, not Mary Whitehouse again'! They just ignore you anyway.

sarahellenwhitney Thu 02-Mar-17 11:12:46

Cough up his money without a doubt.
Lets face it what does a knighthood mean these days.
Because you win a few tennis matches? ,don't you play tennis because you enjoy it.People go on stage make films is that knighthood worthy
You kick a football around get paid £thousands for it and get a knighthood as well?.Ride a bike /lets give him a knighthood.?Those guys did what they did for their enjoyment getting paid for it is a bonus..
The day we hear that a scientist has found a 100% cure for cancer that is the day for a knight hood,Until then D, Beckham and his 'poor me thought I should be knighted'.can take a running jump.

sarahellenwhitney Thu 02-Mar-17 11:15:48

Sorry I got carried away. The word knighthood to me is like a red rag to a bull.

widgeon3 Thu 02-Mar-17 11:38:33

seems like 100% agreement there. What price a democratic process. Spent all last evening noting the propaganda points our non-partisan BBc was making

ExaltedWombat Thu 02-Mar-17 11:42:58

As I remember, the BBC reported it factually in the news bulletin, then gave considerable time to people who wanted to criticise him. What exactly are we complaining about?

vampirequeen Thu 02-Mar-17 11:51:30

I'm not a supporter of the honours system but if people are to be honoured then it should be for doing something over and above the norm, not the job they get (often) well paid for. A manager manages a company,a footballer kicks a ball, a tennis player hits one, a runner runs....all commendable in their own way but do they really deserve to be honoured.

If we have to have an honours system then I would prefer the highest honours go to those who do something really outstanding. My nomination would be Jean Bishop the Hull Bee Lady who has raised over £100K for AgeUK by dressing up as a bee and shaking a tin in Hull City Centre. This lady is in her nineties. Put her name into Google if you've never heard of her and see how incredible she is. She deserves to be Dame Jean Bishop far more than Dame Shirley Bassey who got her honour for being able to sing and earn a lot of money which she avoided paying British tax on by going to live in Switzerland.

grandMattie Thu 02-Mar-17 12:21:19

I agree - the fact that in Beijing, the athletes did well, after many years of being rubbish, didn't mean that they were worthy of knighthoods. What about the poor saps before/after who also worked their little socks off?
What about "Lordships"??? Talk about being able to buy one of those...
I wish they were in the gift of the monarch rather than to her political masters. or even better, left to the people to decide. No Mandelsons, no Kinnocks, no Hesltines, etc. What a difference that would make.

Candelle Thu 02-Mar-17 12:24:05

Sorry but you don't quite understand the facts. Philip Green did not loot the pension fund.

The deficit was caused by the Pensions Regulator insisting that a lower growth rate for the assets should be used and should reflect greater longevity for pensioners.

Philip Green kept BHS running for 15 years beyond its sell by date. BHS demise was caused by clothing customers deserting for Primark and homewares customers shopping online.

He doesn't seem a particularly nice man but he is not a crook and I hate to see inaccurate witch hunts (especially by self-serving MP's!).

By the way the deficit on the state pension is £6 trillion - and rising..........

Morgana Thu 02-Mar-17 12:33:07

And some days there is hardly any news at all!!! Almost nothing about the rest of Europe nor the rest of the world. We watched news on TV 5 last night and they had some interesting stuff totally unreported on our channels. No wonder we are becoming more insular!

radicalnan Thu 02-Mar-17 12:43:45

I have had it with the BLOODY AWARDS, so they got the wrong envelope, who cares? Hours after hour of it on every news channel.

I want proper news and I want it now. Until people refuse en masse to pay the licence we are stuck with it. The programes aren't much better either.

Poldark excepted of course...mmmmmmmm Poldark.

Jaycee5 Thu 02-Mar-17 12:48:47

Candelle. Phillip Green out borrowings of over £300m which was virtually the same amount as the dividend paid to his wife. It was ostensibly for updating and redeveloping the company. If he had kept that money in the company it would not have gone bust.
He sold the company for £1 plus a fixed and floating charge of £35m. It was calling in that charge that brought the company down.
He is still being investigated by the Fraud Squad, the Insolvency Services Fraud Squad and a Parliamentary Committee. It is too soon to say that he did nothing wrong. It certainly seems likely that there are reasons for the Receiver to use their claw back powers to recover the money he paid to his wife.
I think that he has made that payment to keep her out of it.
He may not be a crook but it is too early to decide that and he is certainly not ethical.

Jaycee5 Thu 02-Mar-17 12:51:56

Yorkshiregel. I totally agree.
Laura Keunssberg seems to be close friends with Katherine Vine, current editor of the Guardian. In the week before and days immediately after the bye elections that paper had over 20 anti-Corbyn articles. They only had 3 or 4 critical of UKIP and they even have one today which is favourable to them. They would seriously have preferred UKIP to win Stoke than Labour under Corbyn. So many people take it all at face value.