RSS Feed
January 8th, 2012 
FAKE NEWS for the Zionist agenda - Shareholders will have right to block soaring executive pay under new Government plans
- PM’s ‘fairness agenda aims to convince people he has a vision for ‘a fairer,
better economy, where if you work hard and do
the right thing you get rewarded’
By
Nadia Gilani
Last updated at 11:50 AM on 8th January 2012
David Cameron backed powers for shareholders to veto executive pay packages as political pressure to curb vast salaries and bonuses gathered pace.
The Prime Minister said he was determined to end the ‘merry go round’ of super-rich bosses rubber stamping each others’ inflated deals and being rewarded for failure.
‘The market for top people isn’t working, it needs to be sorted out,’ he told The Sunday Telegraph.
David Cameron, right, unveiled his ‘fairness agenda’ in response to the ‘responsible capitalism’ plan called for by Labour leader Ed Miliband left
He outlined detailed plans for reforms that he said would make hard-working people feel that their ‘graft’ was being rewarded.
Mr Cameron said he would use 2012 to
convince people that he had a ‘vision at the end of this, of a fairer,
better economy, a fairer, better society, where if you work hard and do
the right thing you get rewarded’.
His agenda covers the City, personal taxation, a commitment to water down the power of European judges over human rights — and includes his most significant intervention against any moves towards Scottish independence.
The plans were unveiled in response to
Labour leader Ed Miliband, who has called for a ‘fairer and better
capitalism’, and challenged the Government to back all the recommendations
of the independent High Pay Commission in order to increase transparency
and accountability in the boardroom and the City.
Super-rich: Under the new plans executives would be subject to the democratic will of shareholders over pay
DAVID CAMERON’S FOUR KEY POINTS ON NEW AGENDA
- A major reform of executive pay
where shareholders would have to approve salary packages and, crucially,
pay-offs, instead of simply having advisory votes as at present. This
would be in a bid to rein in what he called ‘crony capitalism’, where
underperforming executives were seen to ‘fill their boots’. - The 50p income tax rate for people
earning more than £150,000 would not be abolished despite criticisms
that it punished enterprise, because ‘you’ve got to take the country
with you’, he said. He also indicated that the Lib Dem plan for a
‘mansion tax’ on high-value properties would not be in the next Budget. - A personal commitment to water
down the power of European human rights judges who had been at the
centre of controversies with rulings that seemed at odds with public
opinion. He will personally try to persuade the Council of Europe, which
oversees the Strasbourg court, that its powers should be limited. - An attempt to create a stronger
and fairer Britain as part of the strategy to keep it united in the face
of the threat from the Scottish National Party to break up the Union.
Mr Cameron called for rapid moves towards a referendum in Scotland,
which he said had to be ‘sooner rather than later’, but which the
Nationalists do not plan until 2014 at the earliest.
Yesterday Ed Miliband emphasised his commitment to ‘responsible capitalism’ saying: ‘If one of the battlegrounds of British politics is going to be who is really going to take action on executive pay, I say, ‘Bring it on”.
Currently shareholders have a right to vote on pay awards, but the vote is ‘advisory’ and often takes place only after decisions have been made on executive pay.
Under the plans being drawn up by cabinet ministers, the vote would, for the first time, have legal force, so that executives would be subject to the democratic will of shareholders over pay.
‘We’ve got to deal with the merry-go-round where there’s too many cases of remuneration committee members sitting on each other’s boards, patting each other’s backs and handing out each other’s pay rises.
‘We need to get to grips with that.’
Meanwhile, new research showed that chief executives in 87 of the FTSE 100 companies took home £5.1 million in basic pay, bonuses, share incentives and pension contributions in 2010-11.
But there was no corresponding rise in the value of their companies, according to the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), which carried out the analysis.
Total remuneration of chief executives increased by 33%, while the average increase in company value was 24 per cent, the think tank said.
The IPPR said reforms to tackle ‘excessive’ boardroom pay should go beyond ‘shareholder activism’.
Nick Pearce, director of IPPR, said: ‘This new analysis confirms that boardroom pay is running far ahead of company performance in many of the UK’s major businesses.
‘Attempts to link pay to performance haven’t worked well because it’s hard for shareholders to monitor the performance of individual executives.
‘Instead, pay deals for top earners have become increasingly complex as well as increasingly generous.
‘Tackling excessive top pay should include steps to ensure that employees get a fairer share of rewards.
‘To reflect the contribution that all employees make to company success, we should make sure that employee representatives sit on remuneration committees and that boards report to all staff annually on pay levels across the company.’
Share this article:
Here’s what other readers have said. Why not add your thoughts,
or debate this issue live on our message boards.
The comments below have not been moderated.
-
Newest -
Oldest -
Best rated -
Worst rated
p,s. the great man hasn’t done anything yet.
Report abuse
Its always about what he intends to do , never about what he has actually done ! If you look at that record its nothing short of a muddled mess !
Report abuse
More promises that mean nothing. No employee should be able to sign their own paycheck!
Report abuse
Surely, under Company Law going back to the beginning of limited companies, 300+ years ago, the shareholders alwys have the right to call a special general meeting, at which they can vote out the directors abd/or revoke any of their decisions? (I suspect the real trouble is that the “institutional shareholders” completely outvote the others, and those institutions are run by the same cabal as provide directors for large companies.)
Report abuse
About as much chance as an ice cream in hell. A millionaire telling us what he’s going to with regard to boardroom excesses is laughable.
Report abuse
Whatever happened to Capitalism and the Free Market principle?
Report abuse
I LIKE JOKES, BUT WHATS THE PUNCHLINE.
Report abuse
Yes, its tricky rewarding business acumen, hard work, innovation, enterprise and judicious risk taking without encouraging greed. Its probably just as difficult for many shop floor workers to appreciate what goes on in the boardroom and the efforts their bosses put in to secure business.
I think a combination of further progressive personal taxation – say 75p in the pound for earnings over £200k plus good company profit sharing schemes for employees enshrined in law is probably likely to be the most effective, equitable and simplest solution in bringing about a fairer society and avoiding the gross excesses of top pay that are so divisive.
Report abuse
It has always been the case where shareholders can block board decisions such as pay, but only if there are enough of them. The problem is that the biggest blocks of shares are held by Banks, Insurance Companies and Hedge funds etc whose executives and directors seek to maintain high salaries and bonuses themselves. It is an “Old Boys” and crony system. Has anyone noticed the way so many executives only stay for a couple of years, get big fat pensions and payoffs, then move to somewhere else, their old jobs being filled by some other executive ‘doing the rounds’.
Report abuse
Mr Cameron needs to be careful. The shareholders of big companies tend to be corporate bodies like pension funds which of course want best possible profits. They themselves have senior staff and directors who are used to receiving huge remuneration and are not likely to be effective in controlling abuses elsewhere. Mr Cameron should be thinking about giving the staff in a company some power to set (or control) the management’s remuneration.
Report abuse
The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.
Related posts:
Views: 0
Posted in 
Tags: 
