This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/oct/18/sir-philip-green-criticises-mps-report-bhs-collapse
The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 5 | Version 6 |
|---|---|
| MP hits back after Sir Philip Green calls BHS collapse report 'bizarre' MP hits back after Sir Philip Green calls BHS collapse report 'bizarre' | |
| (1 day later) | |
| One of the MPs behind a damning report on Sir Philip Green’s handling of BHS has dismissed criticism of their work by the businessman’s lawyers as an attempt to “wiggle off the hook for his responsibilities”. | One of the MPs behind a damning report on Sir Philip Green’s handling of BHS has dismissed criticism of their work by the businessman’s lawyers as an attempt to “wiggle off the hook for his responsibilities”. |
| On Tuesday, Sir Philip Green published a review by his lawyers which hit back at the parliamentary report published in July , calling it “bizarre” and beset by “serious factual errors”. | On Tuesday, Sir Philip Green published a review by his lawyers which hit back at the parliamentary report published in July , calling it “bizarre” and beset by “serious factual errors”. |
| Green published the review as MPs prepare to debate a motion in parliament on Thursday that “the sale of the company to Retail Acquisitions Limited for £1 was clearly not in the interests of British Home Stores’ employees and pensioners”. | Green published the review as MPs prepare to debate a motion in parliament on Thursday that “the sale of the company to Retail Acquisitions Limited for £1 was clearly not in the interests of British Home Stores’ employees and pensioners”. |
| The backbench motion sponsored by six MPs also asks fellow parliamentarians to note the failure of Green to resolve the deficit in the company pension fund over many years and calls on him to fulfil his promise to do so. | The backbench motion sponsored by six MPs also asks fellow parliamentarians to note the failure of Green to resolve the deficit in the company pension fund over many years and calls on him to fulfil his promise to do so. |
| A further amendment tabled by another 11 MPs, including Richard Fuller and Michelle Thomson, calls on the house’s honours forfeiture committee to recommend Green’s knighthood “be cancelled and annulled”. | A further amendment tabled by another 11 MPs, including Richard Fuller and Michelle Thomson, calls on the house’s honours forfeiture committee to recommend Green’s knighthood “be cancelled and annulled”. |
| Ian Wright, the chair of the then business innovations and skills select committee and one of the MPs behind the motion calling on Green to sort out the BHS pension, said: “The report from Sir Philip Green’s no doubt expensively appointed lawyers is just the latest wheeze by Sir Philip to wiggle off the hook for his responsibilities to BHS pension-holders. This legalistic opinion doesn’t question the facts of the unanimously agreed select committee report but it does mirror Sir Philip’s litany of excuses for the collapse of BHS and for his delay in ‘sorting’ the BHS pension deficit. | Ian Wright, the chair of the then business innovations and skills select committee and one of the MPs behind the motion calling on Green to sort out the BHS pension, said: “The report from Sir Philip Green’s no doubt expensively appointed lawyers is just the latest wheeze by Sir Philip to wiggle off the hook for his responsibilities to BHS pension-holders. This legalistic opinion doesn’t question the facts of the unanimously agreed select committee report but it does mirror Sir Philip’s litany of excuses for the collapse of BHS and for his delay in ‘sorting’ the BHS pension deficit. |
| “The select committees heard hours of oral testimony and considered thousands of pages of written evidence in this inquiry and there will be a welcome opportunity to air these issues further in Thursday’s debate.” | “The select committees heard hours of oral testimony and considered thousands of pages of written evidence in this inquiry and there will be a welcome opportunity to air these issues further in Thursday’s debate.” |
| Frank Field, the chair of the work and pensions committee who jointly led the inquiry into BHS with Wright and is also sponsoring the debate motion, is singled out for particular criticism in the review by Green’s lawyers for “repeated insults to witnesses, with bullying and threats” and for making public comments expressing “conclusions before he had heard all of the evidence”. | Frank Field, the chair of the work and pensions committee who jointly led the inquiry into BHS with Wright and is also sponsoring the debate motion, is singled out for particular criticism in the review by Green’s lawyers for “repeated insults to witnesses, with bullying and threats” and for making public comments expressing “conclusions before he had heard all of the evidence”. |
| Field responded by saying that the conclusions and recommendations of the parliamentary report had been agreed unanimously by 10 MPs drawn from two different select committees and were based on “huge amounts of evidence”. | Field responded by saying that the conclusions and recommendations of the parliamentary report had been agreed unanimously by 10 MPs drawn from two different select committees and were based on “huge amounts of evidence”. |
| He added: “My own views were shaped by that evidence as well as the circumstances of those former BHS workers whose jobs have been lost and pensions put at risk. MPs are entitled to have views and to take those views with them into parliament. | He added: “My own views were shaped by that evidence as well as the circumstances of those former BHS workers whose jobs have been lost and pensions put at risk. MPs are entitled to have views and to take those views with them into parliament. |
| “That one of the country’s top legal minds has been drawn in to defend Sir Philip’s actions shows how Herculean that task is. But the house will draw its own conclusions later this week.” | “That one of the country’s top legal minds has been drawn in to defend Sir Philip’s actions shows how Herculean that task is. But the house will draw its own conclusions later this week.” |
| In the review, Lord Pannick QC and Michael Todd QC criticised the MP’s findings, which held the tycoon responsible for leaving BHS with a £571m pension deficit, taking nearly £400m in dividends from the retailer and selling the business for £1 in March 2015 to the serial bankrupt Dominic Chappell’s Retail Acquisitions vehicle. | In the review, Lord Pannick QC and Michael Todd QC criticised the MP’s findings, which held the tycoon responsible for leaving BHS with a £571m pension deficit, taking nearly £400m in dividends from the retailer and selling the business for £1 in March 2015 to the serial bankrupt Dominic Chappell’s Retail Acquisitions vehicle. |
| The lawyers said: “These dividends were lawful and were paid at a time when the BHS pension schemes were in surplus. BHS was not sold until 10 years later. The law does not prevent a company from paying dividends because of a risk that the company might become insolvent many years later. | The lawyers said: “These dividends were lawful and were paid at a time when the BHS pension schemes were in surplus. BHS was not sold until 10 years later. The law does not prevent a company from paying dividends because of a risk that the company might become insolvent many years later. |
| “The main causes of the pension deficit were the increasing longevity of pensioners and the global financial crisis in 2008.” | “The main causes of the pension deficit were the increasing longevity of pensioners and the global financial crisis in 2008.” |
| Green claims that he invested more than his family took out in dividends and used the statement to lambast the work and pensions and business, innovation and skills select committees for “very serious factual and legal errors”. | Green claims that he invested more than his family took out in dividends and used the statement to lambast the work and pensions and business, innovation and skills select committees for “very serious factual and legal errors”. |
| The review said the committees’ inquiry process was “so unfair that, if parliamentary privilege did not prevent a legal challenge, a court would ‘set aside’ the report”. | The review said the committees’ inquiry process was “so unfair that, if parliamentary privilege did not prevent a legal challenge, a court would ‘set aside’ the report”. |
| On BHS’s sale to Chappell, the statement, issued through Green’s holding company, Taveta Investments, said: “There was nothing unlawful, improper or even unusual about Taveta and Sir Philip Green’s decision to assist Dominic Chappell and Retail Acquisitions Limited in the purchase of BHS. The select committees’ criticism in this regard is bizarre.” | On BHS’s sale to Chappell, the statement, issued through Green’s holding company, Taveta Investments, said: “There was nothing unlawful, improper or even unusual about Taveta and Sir Philip Green’s decision to assist Dominic Chappell and Retail Acquisitions Limited in the purchase of BHS. The select committees’ criticism in this regard is bizarre.” |