Showing posts with label bbc. business. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bbc. business. Show all posts

Sunday, 6 November 2011

Business, Finance and Politics are 'Out of Touch' with People ...


Politicians are starting to 'feel the heat' and some are starting to see where the 'wind is blowing' ... Ed Miliband's article from the Observer newspaper today ... published below in full:




"This is a frightening time for Britain: unemployment at record levels, inflation going up, living standards squeezed; a European crisis, lurching from Athens to Brussels to Cannes, adding to the sense that the economy is on the brink; a government sitting on the sidelines, unwilling or unable to help.

That is the backdrop for the protests at St Paul's and hundreds of similar demonstrations in cities across the world. Some are swift to dismiss them for putting forward what is a long list of diverse and often impractical proposals.

Certainly, few people struggling to makes ends meet and worried about what the future holds for their children will have either the time or the inclination to camp outside a cathedral. And many people will not agree with the demands or like the methods of the protesters. But they still present a challenge: to the church and to business – and also to politics. The challenge is that they reflect a crisis of concern for millions of people about the biggest issue of our time: the gap between their values and the way our country is run.

The role of politicians is not to protest, but to find answers. I am determined that mainstream politics, and the Labour party in particular, speaks to that crisis and rises to the challenge.

Many of those who earn the most, exercise great power, enjoy enormous privilege – in the City and elsewhere – do so with values that are out of kilter with almost everyone else. The warning lights on the dashboard are flashing. And only the most reckless will ignore or, still worse, dismiss the danger signals.

The problem – as I said in my Labour conference speech at the end of September – is a system of irresponsible, predatory capitalism based on the short term, rather than productive, responsible behaviour which benefits business and most people in the long term.

Just think about the last couple of weeks: the energy companies making record profits per customer, and the top directors getting a 50% pay rise while everyone else feels their living standards squeezed. Banks not heeding the lessons of the financial crisis: still dishing out big bonuses and still not lending to the entrepreneurs our economy needs.

You do not have to be in a tent to feel angry. People feel let down by aspects of business, finance and politics which seem in touch with the richest 1% – but badly out of touch with the reality facing the other 99%. They wonder if things can be different — and whether politics can make a difference.

There is much about what David Cameron and George Osborne are doing with which I disagree. But our problems go deeper than any one government. "Take what you can." "In it for yourself." "The fast buck." Most people never embraced these values but we were told they would help us, and Britain, to succeed. But too many thought they could do whatever they wanted, and pay themselves whatever they wanted. And some became so powerful or so big, they believed no one would dare challenge them.

When people at the top show such irresponsibility, it should be not be a surprise to find it elsewhere in society too. We must make big changes in the way our country works. And that is why the choices we make now to address people's immediate worries should also pave the way to a better economy, society and country in the long term.

We want the deficit to be reduced. A Labour government would be making measured spending cuts and tax rises. But any family would find it impossible to pay off a mortgage or a credit card bill if no one in that household is earning an income. That is the immediate problem in our economy. With unemployment at a 17-year high, there are not enough people in work to help pay down the deficit. Nowhere is this more true than for young people.

It makes no sense to allow one in five of them to languish out of work. I was talking with members of what could be a "lost generation" in London the other day who, after being out of work for nearly a year, told me there was no hope for them. We must give them hope, not offer more of the same.

The Tories are discussing how to make it easier for firms to fire people. We are developing policies so they can hire people. We would start by creating thousands of new jobs paid for by a tax on the bank bonuses. It is about rewarding the right values, not the wrong values, in our economy. Young people wanting to go to university fear being burdened down with debts of £50,000 when they leave. It makes no sense and it does not reward aspiration and hard work. So, instead of proceeding with tax cuts for the banks as the government plans to do, we should use that money to cut the maximum tuition fee from £9,000 to £6,000.

And we should apply the right values in the rest of our economy. Our welfare system needs change to reflect not just the compassion of our country, but also the values of hard work, contribution and getting something out when you put something in.

Rather than wringing our hands about electricity bills, we would break up the rigged market of the energy cartel so that new competitors can drive prices down. And let us tell the top CEOs that, if they are unwilling to justify their rewards to an employee on the committee that decides salary packages, they will not get it. These choices are all affordable and can all be made now to help get Britain working again for most people. But they also pave the way for a better economy and a more responsible capitalism in future.

Business as usual is not an option. In every generation, there comes a moment when the existing way of doing things is challenged. It happened in 1945. It happened in 1979 and again in 1997. This is another of those moments because the deeper issues raised by the current crisis are too important to be left shivering on the steps of St Paul's. We cannot leave it to the protesters to lead this debate.

But we can only win this debate with a movement which stretches beyond politics. That is why in the months and years ahead Labour is determined to construct and to lead a coalition which includes business and civil society to make the case for a responsible economy, fairer society and a more just world".

Wednesday, 20 May 2009

Poweromics in Business - Rewarding Failure


Rewarding Failure (and Poweromics) are starting to be challenged in Business now too ... take a look at Robert Peston's blog and my comment (83) added to it below:


1. True entrepreneurs are innovative leaders who create long-term value, prosperity and growth (e.g. Dyson) ... people we should nurture, support and reward ... (rather than hinder!)

2. Traditional executives, normally from the finance community, are rarely innovative and tend to systematically destroy long-term value, prosperity and growth (e.g. by failing to innovative and applying simple cost cutting exercises) to obtain a large bonus for achieving short-term financial targets and goals* ... people we should challenge, stop and retrain in 'value management' ... (not reward with massive salaries, pensions, bonuses, and pay-offs for failure!) ...

Rewarding failure has had it's day ... and clear self interest, poor moral values and greed have also had their day too ... the application of Poweromics** is being challenged in Government and it's going to be challenged in business too ... 

More people can see it now and it's not going to go away ... for instance I'm writing a Poweromics** blog with more examples to make sure it doesn't ... and to make sure its addressed once and for all ... and anyone who is doing the same will be linked from it too ...

Poor management and Poweromics** have had their day - and with the help of the internet they will soon change forever, and for the better ...


David Clift, a Future 500 Leader


* 21st century leadership and management are completely different to traditional leadership and management, and focus on continuously improving the long-term value of an enterprise and the lives of people ... not creating fear and sacking them.

** Poweromics = People using position and power for their own personal gain, based on poor moral values, self interest and greed ... ... take a look at my previous BBC blog comments for instance.



–––––––––––––

  • Comment 87 (godfreybrown) 


    Re 64 William 1965

    I agree with you when you say no person who heads up an organisation (as opposed to owning the business) should be able to earn more in one year than the avarage equally well educated working person can earn in a lifetime. 

    It is nonsense to say for anyone to say that the sums of money our top bankers and captains of industry deserve to paid the vast sums of money they are now being paid. 

    As recent events have shown moany of them managed to get to the top either through nepotisim or the old boy network and as a result we have ended up with far too many business clones suffering from high levels of inbred business idocy and insufficient entreprenurial flair. 

    Re: 70 pawns or players

    I disagree with you when you say top bankers need to be sufficiently incentivised if they are to do the job we expect of them properly and what a good many who are earning considerably less could do equally well. There is nothing magic in being a top banker providing you have the right connections.

    I am totally in favour of someone with genuine entreprenurial flair and business accumin (such as James Dyson) earning vast riches for his ingenutiy, enterprise and genuine hard work over many many years. 

    Neither am I against top bankers who put their own money at risk to earn over many years to earn themselves a vast fortune providing it is on the understanding that if the bank goes bust, in the way that we have seen banks go bust recently, then they lose everything they own.

    It is a fallacy to say that there are insufficient numbers of suitable people about who can run these sort of organisations. Most large enterprises have very good succession plans in place and if the boards of these companies believe they need to recruit someone exceptional to do the job they want doing then it is time for some of them to be put out to grass because as the saying goes "they have reached their level of incompetence"


    –––––––––––––


    Comment 88 (whatevernext1)


    Only 60% of "shareholders" voted against despite the climate being so obviously against such greed. Presumably the 60% felt public pressure is mounting such that they had to do something whereas in the past they turned a blind eye.

    The key problem is that the fund maangers are not the real shareholders - who are mainly pension savers - and fund managers and others in the City are on the same gravy train of paying themselves huge amounts effectively from our savings as the PLC directors.

    Labour has not changed corporate governance to allow those whose money is actually invested in these companies the ability to vote on key issues such as Board appointments and remuneration. 

    Why?-because they get huge political contributions from the City, PLC directors etc and former cabinet ministers and senior civil servants get lucrative appointments with PLC's and in the City.

    From expenses to corporate governance, corruption is rife, and we the ordinary public are the ones paying for it through taxes and raids on our pension savings.


    –––––––––––––


    Comment 89 (alphaptarmigan)


    Today I attended an Investment conference, hosted by one of our biggest fund managers and this "Corporate Governance" issue generated similar anger from the attendees as the MPs expenses issue. Fund Managers were being encouraged to create a new forum to exercise shareholder power.I can't help but wonder that all this is symptomatic of increasing disatisfaction with the inequalities between the top and the middle/average earners in our society.


    Looks to me like we are gaining a new enthusiasm for democracy at all levels!


    –––––––––––––