Sir Fred Goodwin, the former chief executive of the Royal Bank of Scotland who became a focal point for anger over the financial crisis, has obtained a super-injunction banning the media from identifying him as a banker.
The existence of the super-injunction was revealed today by John Hemming, a back-bench Liberal Democrat MP who tabled a question in Parliament about the gagging order.
Normally the media is forbidden from even reporting that a super-injunction exists but Parliamentary privilege allows MPs to speak on the floor of the House of Commons without risk of prosecution.
Subscribe
-
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
-
Like us on Facebook
-
Subscribe to our feed
-
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Most Read
Search
Op-eds
-
Mark Pack writes…The challenges ahead for the party (Mark Pack)
-
Prioritising soft Conservative voters will always lead to failure (Paul Pettinger)
-
A Progressive Alliance for 2024 (Brian Robinson)
-
Observations of an ex pat: Dealing with lies (Tom Arms)
-
Tactical voting sites sold us myths – they’ll never be trusted again (Peter Blake)

-
The crypt beneath St Wystan's, Repton
-
John Arlott: "One of the great English radical Liberals of the 20th century"
-
Suvivants: Amnomalies Quantiques, by Leo
-
Thank you!
-
Some initial thoughts on how the Labour Party could rebuild from this defeat and win the next election
-
My tweets
-
Please save your stamps for charity!
-
Escalating the climate emergency
-
Community facility offer from Revival Church #dundeewestend
Recent Comments
frankie 15th Dec - 2:10am
A party of just you then David, all the yellow book leaders have left for greener pastures. Tis sad for you but true.David Evershed 15th Dec - 2:04am
Our increased membership has drawn a large number of remain fanatics into the party who, with Getting Brexit Done, will now melt away. I see...Michael BG 15th Dec - 1:13am
The short answer to Nick Barlow is no. A talking shop two day conference in the spring will provide no solutions to the changes which...George Kendall 15th Dec - 12:38am
Chris Bowers asks: "what is the role of a liberal party in a social-media and echo-chamber dominated era, and what do we actually stand for?"...George Kendall 15th Dec - 12:04am
What the IFS said about us: "If you want big increases in taxation and spending then Labour and Liberal Democrats have plenty to offer." In...Martin 14th Dec - 10:55pm
“The Lib Dems will have a period of difficult adjustment as some of the army of fervent Remainers melt away" Given a period of sustained...
9 Comments
How sad for those of you living in the UK. You lack the basic tenets of freedom of speech and press. Can we get the name of the judge who gave this super injunction ? I guess his or her identity is secret too. What irony, I bet the citizens of Egypt now have greater freedoms of expression than citizsens of the UK, LOL.
Someone call Max Clifford. This man needs some PR advice!
And somewhat inevitably, #fredgoodwinisabanker is now trending on Twitter!
At first I thought it was typo, I know many people have used a word similar to banker to describe Mr Goodwin….
So we can no longer refer to Sir Fred Goodwin as a “banker”. OK, so what can we call him? Suggestions on a postcard …
….a complete banker?
Need I remind people that the collective noun for a group of bankers is a wunch?
The lawyers who push these superinjunctions are really not advising their clients very well. Look what happened with Trafigura and now this is all over the internet and probably result in more damage that would otherwise have been the case.
As to an appropriate description for “bankers” such as Goodwin (rather than good old fashioned bankers who used to take a turn between borrowing and lending rates and performed a valuable role in matching savers and borrowers) would be dealers or casino operators or similar.
I wonder what the injunction actually said and if it really says you can’t describe him as a banker or someone is just taking a mischeiviously over restrictive interpretiation to point up the ridiculousness of some super-injunctions.
That was really what happened with Trafigura as really the Guardian very cleverly promoted an overly restrictive view on what they could say rather than going back to the court to clarify the point.