Do you think he did the right thing?

Green does not appear to be a very moral sort of person. He possibly manages to stay just on the right side of the law... maybe! His actions with BHS were not laudable. If you need to invoke NDAs it makes me think there is certainly bad behaviour going on. It is not morally right that you can avoid public judgement because you are rich. Peter Hain has exposed a member of the HoL as an unpleasant person. It is for the judiciary to decide if he is guilty. I hope the exposure does not jeopardise any legal process.

I think Lord Hain did the right thing. Why just because you have money should you be able gag the press and protect yourself when the same does not apply to a person without the means to do the same, example a man accused falsely of rape. Also after selling BHS for a pound and trying to dodge paying his employees their pensions I think he should be stripped of his title (how he was ever given it in the first place beggars belief) he is in my opinion a smarmy spiv.

If he is innocent why did he pay the alleged abused women

I have been looking at various press articles about this man. He sound awful! He and his spokespeople are careful to say he did nothing " unlawful" but are not denying absolutely the claims of racist/ sexist behaviour. It seems his money is in his wife's na.e. She lives in Monaco and business is registered in Jersey. Legal but not, imo, a very moral choice if one alsp accepts to be a Lord in the British parliament! He won't be the only one!

Good post POGS. I agree with everything you have said.

I'm on the fence about whether Peter Hain did the right thing in exposing Philip Green, but there might be one good thing that cones out of this: it might deter wealthy, influential, predatory men, who think that they can buy their way out of facing up to their actions by seeking super injunctions in the future. Vastly wealthy people should go through the same judicial processes as anyone else imo.

cones should be comes.

If Peter hadn’t done it would there be any talk of a change in the law for the likes of Green to pay for silence

Chewbacca with you there. Money should not buy you exemption from legal process..if there is a legal case to answer. All should be equal under the law. Peter Hain, so I gather, is a good local MP. Centre Left politically. Comes from a family background of fighting inequality of course.

Absolutely believe he did the right thing. Powerful people using their wealth and influence is unacceptable. NDAs should very rarely if ever be used and certainly not in such circumstances.

IMO, NDAs should be outlawed.
There is no hiding place for the (wo)man on the street, should (s)he be falsley accused or have their name bandied about in the media as a suspect where no firm evidence corroborates the articles.
You may say that there is no smoke without fire but there is often a mist shrouding some printed news which can be, erroneously, mistaken for smoke.
If Green was named was in other countries with different privacy laws (indeed, it was widely viewable on the internet) then it was better that Peter Hain put an end to speculation. He did the right thing. One law for ALL.

* named in, not named was in

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6322295/BARONESS-ROS-ALTMANN-Sir-Philip-Green-bullied-menacing-late-night-texts.html

This is an interesting article - sorry it's from the Daily Mail!

In answer to annie's question - the theory is that mud sticks so you are not admitting guilt, just saving you reputation.

And, I think a woman mp had threatened to do what Peter Hain did.

I was part of Peters campaign in the sixties to stop whites only in sport in S.A. he was prosecuted .

I think that while we have such a court system that leans to anyone with money being able to stop their name being put out into the public I agree with Peter Hain did. The law needs to be changed and to make the same rules for everyone

The majority of MP’s support Peters decision .

Thank you kitty

I am very pleased that he was named as there should not be one law for the rich and famous and another for the rest of us. Either name everyone or nobody. Money should not buy special treatment when it is a legal matter.

Peter Hain, so I gather, is a good local MP. Centre Left politically
He's not a constituency MP any longer PECS as he did not stand in, I think, 2015, and is not in the HoL.

Peter Hain has been a high profile campaigner, MP for very many years, since the 1960s - he did campaign against apartheid and yes, someone brought a spurious private prosecution re that when he spoke against apartheid - however he was convicted and fined. He came originally from SA so knew what he was talking about.
He was a Liberal, later Labour and served as NI Secretary, Welsh Secretary amongst other Cabinet posts.

He's a well-respected campaigner and ex-MP, now member of the HoL and, even if Green "had something on him" anniegold I doubt very much if it is anything near Green's shameful actions.

I continue to be bewildered by your post.

Well done Ros Altmann for speaking up (*kittylester's link*)

I think we knew at the time he was bullying those in charge of trying to ensure BHS pensioners received their due and did not want Green to 'cut and run' with his riches. His appearance before the HoC Select Committee says a lot, too.

How long before this man is stripped of his undeserved title?

Think Hain made a mistake - he should not have said anything while there is civil legal action still in process. And he should have known of this having links with one of the legal firms involved.

Jalima I knew he was no longer an MP..should have said was. DH was at school with him and still meets him at footie!

Peter Hain has done what a lot of us wish we could have done.

If Mister Green is completely innocent - as he states - then I hope Peter Hain will go on to ask him if he's in the habit of throwing very large amounts of money at lawyers to obtain a court order which he obviously doesn't need - IF he's the saint he purports to be.

Hmm..I don't think PG is claiming complete innocence..just saying he has not done anything illegal! So no illegal sexist or racist behaviour but maybe legal and racist behaviour! He claims he can't be racist because he has a black chauffeur ???

I think Peter Hain is wrong.

He has opened the floodgates of 'trial by press' not a jury.

We (i.e. the public) are once again subjected to a flurry of 'juicy' reports and speculation. These people are often found not to be as guilty as the newspapers (selling, don't forget) make them out to be.

However, the subject is Peter Hain and I think he was mistaken in using his Parliamentary privilege as he did.

Charge and jury trial in any case, not speculation and innuendo.

Vacillating.