The Commons debate on Sir Philip Green’s knighthood was entertaining – or as entertaining as a debate can be when all sides agree the fellow is a damned rascal who should not have been given a gong in the first place.
Iain Wright, chair of the business select committee that co-authored the report on the demise of BHS, provided the most memorable line. “He took the rings from BHS’s fingers, beat it black and blue, starved it of food and water, put it on life support and then wanted credit for keeping it alive.” It could serve as a reverse citation if the honours forfeiture committee removes the knighthood, as it surely will unless Green very quickly presents a large cheque to cover the deficit in the BHS pension fund.
Yet the two-hour debate also felt absurd for the reason hinted at above: is anyone surprised that Green turned out not to be a cuddly capitalist from the John Lewis school of shopkeeping?
Green’s robust approach had been documented for years before Tony Blair awarded him the knighthood in 2006. Recall the saga of this paper’s analysis of Green’s finances in 2003, soon after the BHS purchase; the tycoon’s angry tirade was a classic of a genre he had made his own. Blair, presumably seeking to rekindle the Britpop buzz of his early years as PM, embraced Topshop, Kate Moss and the Green caravan. He didn’t stop to consider the principle of honouring a man who paid the dividends to his Monaco-resident wife. The award was ludicrous.
But, then, the whole game of awarding knighthoods to business people is riddled with mutual back-scratching and short-termism. Business empires fall, even banks collapse and supposed heroes can be revealed as having feet of clay. The time to judge a business leader’s contribution is when his or her career is over – or even half a decade later.
It is hard to summon the same fury as the MPs over Green’s gong, as opposed to his shabby sale of BHS to an obviously unsuitable buyer. Removal would satisfy the simple sense that “a billionaire spiv who has shamed British capitalism”, as Labour’s David Winnick put it, deserves to have his ego pricked. Yet two things will not change. Green will still have a moral obligation to repair the damage to BHS’s pension fund, which is probably where MPs should concentrate their efforts. And the honours system, as it applies to mid-career business people, will still be daft.
Nasser’s replacement at BHP Billiton will need a deft touch
Jac Nasser is departing BHP Billiton after six years as chairman and one of the big jobs in the Australian business world is up for grabs. The world’s largest miner will have no difficulty in recruiting another heavyweight figure, but the role won’t have quite the same allure as it did back in 2010.
Back then, the living was easy for the entire mining industry. The commodity supercycle was in full swing, thanks to China’s infrastructure splurge, and the debate in the boardrooms was about the pace of expansion – fast, or very fast. BHP, to its credit, had a keener sense than most of its rivals that the good times would not last for ever. Thus, when the inevitable bust in commodity prices arrived, it avoided the humiliation of a rights issue. Others didn’t, thus Nasser can depart BHP while pointing to a superior record on total shareholder returns.
But let’s not pretend BHP was a model of self-discipline. The failure to buy PotashCorp of Saskatchewan in 2010 was a lucky escape. The entry into the US shale market the following year – just before oil prices collapsed – was timed horribly and big write-offs followed. The company was also too slow to cut its dividend after the Samarco dam disaster in Brazil in which 19 people died.
Samarco will consume much of BHP’s attention in coming years in the form of legal battles and compensation claims. As will the on-off spats with Australian politicians who, in more straitened times, want to protect their tax revenues. The next chair of BHP can afford to know little about mergers and acquisitions – deft political skills are at a premium.
Ryanair: return flight check-in charge is not so nice
So much for Michael O’Leary’s vow not to “unnecessarily piss people off.” Ryanair’s chief executive has provoked the wrath of some of his customers by announcing plans to charge £6 for customers wishing to check in more than four days before a flight. Current policy is to allow free check-in beginning seven days before a flight for unallocated seats, which is vaguely convenient if you’re off for a week’s holiday and fear being fleeced on roaming charges while abroad.
Ryanair says the shift is designed to benefit those passengers who pay between £8 and £15 to reserve a particular seat in advance; they will have more time to pick their spot. This sounds like self-serving nonsense. easyJet allows free online check-in up to 30 days before a flights and still manages to operate a reservation system. Ryanair could do the same if it wished. Being nicer, it seems, is a flexible policy.
