Nigel Farage

[oldius]

Agreed it’s a non event to everyone else.
But like it or lump it Human Rights is big business here.
Anyone, or organisation who threatens the principles, always leads to a big song and dance.

If you believe that is the crux of the issue.

I happen to think that it is a financial matter, primarily, but one where a private bank has made a decision on commercial grounds, for two reasons: firstly, post-mortgage, he no longer satisfies their financial criteria for an account; secondly, he comes with a degree of baggage that could impact on their business. Like it or not, people are making decisions about their personal business based on their politics, and an association with Farage for a commercial enterprise comes with a risk, like it or not.

 

[BlueHammer85]

That this private banking issue has been occupying headlines, and been the subject of endless tweets and articles by certain publications, tells you everything you need to know about the way the media manipulates the narrative. This issue is utterly inconsequential to the vast majority of the UK, and would never affect their banking arrangements, but this man has managed to bring it to mainstream attention and convince the masses of some Machiavellian plot that could affect us all, when the reality is so, so much different.

Yep complete diversion tactics and to bury the Wootton scandal - how Farage is dragging this out is very skilled and impressive.

 

[oldius]

Yep complete diversion tactics and to bury the Wootton scandal - how Farage is dragging this out is very skilled and impressive.

Skills or narcissism, you decide!

 

[halfmist]

If you believe that is the crux of the issue.

I happen to think that it is a financial matter, primarily, but one where a private bank has made a decision on commercial grounds, for two reasons: firstly, post-mortgage, he no longer satisfies their financial criteria for an account; secondly, he comes with a degree of baggage that could impact on their business. Like it or not, people are making decisions about their personal business based on their politics, and an association with Farage for a commercial enterprise comes with a risk, like it or not.

As I have said in other posts .
If it’s a financial decision, no problem.
If that’s the case the decision is objective and Farage has no case to answer.
However Coutts, as far as I am aware, has not carried out a financial audit on all its clients to see if they meet the criteria.
I know of at least 3 people with Accounts who do not meet the financial criteria which is being banded about and as far as I am aware their accounts are safe.
Also if the decision is purely financial, why even mention the other factors in the internal Memo

 

[nellyonthewing]

Not a fan of him BUT he has used his position to highlight the imo the poison that has infiltrated public and private organisations in this country.
The rise and rise of the diversity agenda is disproportionate to the problem.
Human Resources push this mantra, Staff are shit scared of being cancelled, a few social media nazis stir the pot . Some of the woke sisterhood rise to the top and make diversity the raisin d’etre of the organisation.
Just my opinion having observed much of this fortunately at the end of my working days .

 

[west didsblue]

Ok. Let’s say your version of events is true and there were no political considerations it was closed purely for financial reasons
Then surely there is no story, move along, close case.
So why are the Financial Authorities going to tighten up the rules re political considerations that’s going to be announced this week.
Don’t come up with crappy conspiracy theories about Tory interference because it’s Farage because it’s nonsense spouted by some on here.
Give me your own opinion for a change rather than tow the leftie line.
If these decisions are left to someone with views like the lefties on here we are doomed.
Decisions should be made on facts not opinions-and if it’s purely financial,treat everyone the same.
They will be closing a hell of a lot of accounts as wealth is not just about the amount of money in one of their low interest bearing accounts.

No Tory interference you say?

Obviously the Prime Minister wasn’t interfering when he tweeted this.

 

[west didsblue]

Yep complete diversion tactics and to bury the Wootton scandal - how Farage is dragging this out is very skilled and impressive.

It’s only matched by how his biggest fan on here is dragging it out on this thread by saying the same inane things time and again and rambling about baying mobs and lefties to keep the word count up in his idiotic posts.

 

[halfmist]

Remember this?



or this?



What about this one?



And finally this one?

Since you pretend not to understand what point I’m making, I will spell it out for you.

There you were, as patronising and condescending as Mcfc1632 ever was, explaining why Coutts is just one part of the larger NatWest group and not a separate entity in its own right.

But then in your rush to leave Oldham behind you jumped to Farage’s defence by saying he had been denied an account on the basis of his political beliefs. But the only way that can be right (because he was offered a Nat West account) is if Coutts and Nat West are in fact separate entities, which is precisely the opposite of what you’ve been bloviating.

So you were either wrong when you said they were part of the same group, or you were wrong

when you said Farage had been denied an account, because he’d been offered a replacement account within the same group.

All I asked was which one was wrong.

But we both know you aren’t going to admit you contradicted yourself because that’s not how you roll, is it?

I think I get your point.
Unlike you, I have to reply to about 10 posters at a time I think it’s called hunting in packs a quite popular past time on here who find it works better thinking for each other.
I THINK, in order to give posters a timely reply I may have omitted the word Coutts in front of my reply for which I apologise
So for the sake of clarity and to spell it out to you …
Coutts, a wholly owned subsidiary of Nat West Group decided to close Farages Account.
Coutts, a wholly owned subsidiary did not offer Farage an alternative COUTTS account.
They told him initially that he could not have a COUTTS account because he no longer met their financial criteria.
It subsequently emerged that other factors, as written in the Memo may have been taken in to account.
Alison Rose the CEO of NAT WEST Group PLC the ultimate owners of Coutts wrote an apology to Farage.
There is now an enquiry as to who knew what and when.
If Ms Rose is found to have taken part in the ultimate decision to deny Farage an account with Coutts, based on his beliefs, then she may be forced to resign.
It has emerged that other Institutions may also have decided who can or cannot own an account based on their beliefs.
Because of the above the rules are going to be changed so that no person can be refused an account on the basis of their beliefs.
My points are
1)It’s not about Farage it’s about a principle.
2)The Government are involved , not because it’s Farage as some posters on here believe, it’s about freedom of beliefs
3) The Financial Services authorities are getting involved, not because it’s Farage but for the same reasons as point 2.
There you are, hopefully clarity on my thoughts and it saves you the trouble of trawling through 55 pages of the thread.
Oh and being offered a bog standard account with the PARENT company is a complete red herring to the issues at stake.

 

[halfmist]

No Tory interference you say?

Obviously the Prime Minister wasn’t interfering when he tweeted this.

I may be wrong but isn’t he making a case for freedom of speech, a fundamental principle of a Democracy.
I would have expected him to speak out even if it had been Mr Corbyn at the centre of attention

 

[halfmist]

Not a fan of him BUT he has used his position to highlight the imo the poison that has infiltrated public and private organisations in this country.
The rise and rise of the diversity agenda is disproportionate to the problem.
Human Resources push this mantra, Staff are shit scared of being cancelled, a few social media nazis stir the pot . Some of the woke sisterhood rise to the top and make diversity the raisin d’etre of the organisation.
Just my opinion having observed much of this fortunately at the end of my working days .

I have known of some very good ethnic minority candidates being refused positions because the Employer is shit scared they will pull the race card on them.
They are also worried about other employees who may crack jokes or make a remark seen as racist and they are then dragged in front of a Tribunal or have to take disciplinary action against the employee which just causes all sorts of problems with other staff.
So they just stay well clear.