Posted by Hari on Thursday, May 19, 2016 with No comments | Labels: Roundup
High pay for bosses
hurting economy says Bank of England's top economist
Excessive pay for top bosses is holding back economic growth
in Britain, the chief economist of the Bank of England, Andy Haldane, has
warned. Mr Haldane, who has earned a reputation as one of the central bank’s
most radical minds, highlighted in a speech in Westminster the fact that FTSE
100 bosses are now paid 150 times the average UK worker. Mr Haldane, in a
speech to the annual dinner of the reformist New City Agenda think tank, added
that the damage done to social capital by the bad behaviour of banks in the
run-up up to the financial crisis was one of the reasons the economy’s recovery
has been so disappointing by historical standards. “A lack of trust in finance
potentially hobbles both economic growth and financial stability” he said.
“Unaddressed, that jeopardises future wealth and well-being”. Social capital
refers to trust and relationships in a society and Mr Haldane argued this
matters “every bit as much to wealth and well-being” as financial capital such
as stocks and shares and other such assets. So far in 2016 there have been
major pay revolts by shareholders at the oil giant BP, the mining group
Anglo-American and the engineering company Weir, all over the level and
structure of proposed remuneration packages to chief executives. A focal point
of protest next month is expected to be the annual general meeting of the
advertising conglomerate WPP where the annual pay of its chief executive and
founder Sir Martin Sorrell is expected to soar to £70m. But Mr Haldane, who is
paid £215,627 a year by the Bank of England, was sceptical about the efforts of
shareholder groups, alone, to rein in top pay since their votes were often
non-binding on managements. “With very few exceptions, no differences were made
to executive compensation packages as a result of investor action” he said, referring
to pay insurrections in recent years. Instead, he suggested politicians should
consider reforming the 2006 Companies Act, and requiring managements to place
more weight on the interests of employees and customers alongside shareholders.
“The shareholder-centric model may have become a recipe for depleting long-term
company wealth-creation and, thus, societal well-being” he said. INDEPENDENT
George Osborne'S 2003 pledge
to scrap 'very unfair' tuition fees comes to light
A letter by a young Conservative MP called George Osborne,
in which the writer criticises the introduction of university tuition fees,
describing them as very unfair and a “tax on learning”, has been discovered by
a former constituent. Violinist Rosy Williams was looking through a box of old
papers on Monday when she came across the letter, written in 2003 on House of
Commons-headed notepaper. In it the up-and-coming MP for Tatton - now
chancellor of the exchequer – thanks her for responding to an earlier letter
seeking her views, and those of other young people in Cheshire, on national
issues. He writes: “It is clear from the hundreds of replies I had that one of
the issues that most concerns people your age is university tuition fees. It is
hardly surprising... When I was at university 10 years ago, my education was
free. Since then, the government has imposed fees, which mean that most
students today pay more than £1,000 a year to go to university. Now they want
to go further and introduce so-called ‘top-up fees’, which will mean students
paying £3,000 a year for their education. To my mind, this is a tax on learning
and is very unfair.” Osborne goes on to say that with the abolition of grants,
students faced leaving college with debts of around £18,000. “There is lots of
evidence that it is this fear of going into debt that most puts people from
poorer backgrounds off going to university … As a result of listening to
students and their families across the country, I thought you would be
interested to know that the Conservatives have just announced that we will
scrap tuition fees altogether when we are next in government. Education will
once again be free for students.” At that time Osborne was toeing the party
line – the Conservatives opposed tuition fees, which were first introduced by
the Labour government in 1998 at £1,000, and subsequently raised to £3,000. Williams
discovered the letter the day the current Conservative government’s latest
thinking on tuition fees was published in its higher education white paper. It
announced that from next year universities will be allowed to increase annual
fees above the current £9,000-a-year cap in line with inflation. GUARDIAN
Britain's second
biggest energy firm SSE posts profits of £1.5bn despite losing 370,000
customers
Profits from SSE’s retail business, which sells direct to
families, were £455.2m. This was virtually identical to the year before,
despite the loss of 370,000 customers, most of whom switched to cheaper deals
with rivals. The fact the company was able to protect its profits while losing
customers provides further evidence of unfair prices, according to critics. All
the ‘big six’ energy companies have been accused of bolstering profits by
failing to pass on sharp falls in the wholesale cost of gas and electricity
over the past two years. SSE confirmed its profit margin per customer last year
was 5.2 per cent, which was up from an average of 4.1 per cent for the past
four years. Mark Todd, the co-founder of price comparison site Energy Helpline,
said: ‘SSE has lost customers yet is making the same amount of money as last
year. This is not a magic trick, it’s a cunning trick. SSE has simply passed on
price cuts as slowly as possible and has made more money per customer.’ SSE,
which also trades under the names Southern Electric and SWALEC, has 8.2m
customers, making it second only to British Gas. Yesterday it revealed adjusted
profit before tax of £1.5bn for the whole company during the 2015/16 financial
year, which was down marginally on the year before. DAILY MAIL
Company pension black
hole inquiry: After BHS crisis, MPs will quiz FTSE bosses over multi-billion
deficits
Blue chip firms such as BAE Systems, Tesco and BT have all
run up massive deficits due to an underperforming stock market and what some
have described as over-generous schemes. It follows the crisis surrounding the
BHS pension scheme which has a £571m black hole. Although the firm had been
taking steps to add extra money, it has been criticised because it would have
taken 23 years to clear the deficit. Experts warn the country is now on the
brink of a pension crisis, with some schemes facing collapse unless urgent
action is taken. Senior MP Frank Field has pledged to launch an investigation
into the issue. His influential Work and Pensions Committee will examine the
private pension system and could recommend a change in the law. It will
particularly focus on schemes which have large black holes – meaning the amount
of assets they hold is far less than the pensions they have promised to pay
savers. Bosses of firms with major deficits could be hauled into Parliament to
explain how they plan to ensure that workers get the pensions they saved for. Worst
on the list was defence giant BAE Systems, which had a £5.4bn deficit – more
than a third of the total size of the £15bn company. It has around 125,500
current and former employees with savings in the scheme. BT is also high up on
the list. Its £7bn deficit was nearly a quarter the size of the £30bn company.
There is more than 308,000 people in its pension scheme. Tesco’s deficit stood
at £3.2bn, or 12 per cent of its £26.5bn value. Its scheme has around 350,000
members. BP’s worldwide deficit was £5.5bn, or 7 per cent of its £75bn value. A
spokesman said he didn’t know how many people were in the oil company’s various
schemes. Britain’s largest water company, Thames Water Utilities, has run up a
£250m black hole in its pension pot since it was taken over by a consortium led
by Australian bank Macquarie which extracted at least £1.6bn in dividends and
interest. DAILY MAIL
Ryanair revolt takes
off as more than 5,000 disgruntled customers join court case against rip-off
admin fees
Online firm CaseHub is looking for people stung with charges
of up to €70 (£55) to check in or replace a boarding card and €160 (£126) to
amend documents. CaseHub argues that these fees are illegal under EU rules and
that passengers who have paid them should be refunded. Another 70,000 passengers
need to sign up before the case will be heard. Casehub will take 35 per cent of
any cash won as a fee. Ryanair says it does not comment on ‘speculation’. Casehub
is bringing a separate law suit against other airlines including British
Airways, Virgin and Monarch over excessive fees for reclaiming Air Passenger
Duty. You only pay this tax — which costs up to £73 for economy trips — if you
board a flight from the UK. If you miss your flight or it’s cancelled, you can
reclaim it, but the admin fees can swallow up the refund. A BA spokesman says
it is ‘clear during the booking process’ that a fee may apply. Monarch says the
charge reflects the cost in making refunds. Virgin says it charges, as making
the refund is a ‘manual procedure’. DAILY MAIL
PPI victims 'should
have got £5bn more'
£5bn is the total amount that claims management companies
charged clients to process their complaints. MPs on the Public Accounts
Committee (PAC) said they were disappointed the money did not go to the victims
of the scandal. Their report said this amounted to "a failure of
regulation and redress". Consumers can complain directly to the Ombudsman
free of charge - yet so far, 80% of those who have done so, have chosen to go
through claims management companies, which take up to a third of any money paid
out. Since April 2011, more than £22bn has been paid out in compensation to those
who were sold the insurance policies by banks, but did not necessarily need
them. Members of the PAC were critical of the role of the regulator, the
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), and the Treasury. It said they, and others,
were too slow in taking responsibility for the situation and "too passive
in allowing it to happen". The committee said it was also concerned about
future potential mis-selling - for example, with people who have accessed money
from their pension savings. BBC NEWS
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.