Mentioning no names

If a chair is doing their job properly they should know what is going on within their company or organization, if they don't they are not. In either case they should resign and be held responsible.

If the buck stops before it reaches the Chair of a company, then that Chair should not be there drawing what is almost certainly an obscene salary.

Not mentioning any countries, but should awards of any kind that are found to have been made on the basis of obscenely large amounts of money being handed over (I think they're called Bribes) then lose whatever it is they were awarded.

If the Chair did not know he deserves to go for not knowing.

The chair should always resign in these cases.

I feel the same pompa its has to be collusion, negligence or incompetence possibly all three.

Yes pompa - absolutely right.

I agree with pompa

Hells Bells, I must be losing my touch, that's 4 Gner's that agree with me, must be a first

Has Gransnet really got this sensitive about libel?!!!

I agree with pompa but do any of us think that is really going to happen?

Are we talking about Septic Blatter here? (tabloids sharp as ever )

Sooner have the topic getting responses and comments rather than deleted by the 'powers' * jinglbellsfrocks*

jinglbellsfrocks*

I also think that the chair is not a person to fall on their sword and is Teflon coated. Too many others may be redundant if the chair goes.

I think its better not to mention names or alleged offences in any situation where prosecution is being considered.

The wrong remarks and speculation might mean that any potential guilty parties might decide to argue that they could not get a fair trial because of what has been said in the media.

If this happened the truly guilty might get away scot free and that would not be a good outcome.

Hypothetically of course, mentioning no specific incidents, or Teflon coated alleged offenders.

Surely we are talking about a totally hypothetical case here, aren't we ?

But of course pompa. Heaven forbid otherwise.

pompa I must be a member of your fan club because I also agree with you!

Any chair person of any company or public body should immediately offer their resignation when there are allegations of serious financial irregularities; they either know about the alleged offences and are therefore liable to be charged with civil or criminal charges or they are so bloody incompetent that they should not be in the job. There can not be any argument otherwise surely? The alleged offences of which we speak have been public knowledge for many years, or at least they have been if you read 'Private Eye' and there is more to come. Allegedly.

Ok folks, be very careful or there will be cries of "it's a clique"

The old boys network always wins in these situation not true honest behaviour.

If someone was to be overseeing a situation such as the hypothetical one mentioned, and didn't offer to resign, would it be reasonable to assume that the person was suffering from some form of medical condition and was therefore not fit to do the job?

Possibly...

I think any chair nowadays has to realise that the buck stops with them, and that they have to make the most of what could be a potentially short reign, especially in that business. It's far easier to winkle out fraudsters nowadays.