Can someone explain to me what all the fuss is about this bankers rather hefty pension? Sure, half a million or so quid a year is very nice, but why is the Government getting all upset about it when they were the ones that signed it off in the first place?
Are the likes of Harriet Harman complaining on the BBC about the immorality really expecting us to forget that they themselves are a member of the Establishment aristocracy, and more so that they didn't complain about any of these sort of nice deals for board members during the good times.
If it immoral now it must have been immoral then surely? Or is it only immoral when people are paying attention thus you might lose votes in it? Or, more accurately, is it only immoral when you are prostituting yourself to the populist left in your party in the blind hope they might take a punt on you as the Madam to lead the Whorehouse out of the gutter?
At the end of the day, as I think others have commented elsewhere, this little scandal over a massive pension is merely a well constructed distraction. It keeps the news that the Government has bailed out many of the banks more than once now off thwe front page. It builds cloud over the fact that the taxpayer is carrying liabilties now for probably two generations. It stops the split in the Government over the Post Office leading the news.
Men like Sir Fred Goodwin having been getting these sort of deals for years and they will continue to do so. They are but a single corner piece in a 10,000 piece jigsaw that makes up a much bigger and more important picture that we really ought to be paying attention too.