Looks like Cameron means serious business against the fat cats.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...pay-deals.html

F##k me! you can't possibly believe that rhetorical bullsh#t?

And what the hell are you reading that rag for?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/v...-bonuses-video

Err try that one, or just about any other you care to mention.

Obviously the lefty nutters are getting their knickers in a twist with embarrasment, watching him do the job that they had been expected to do, but failed miserably.

Nice try mate. But tribal lefties will never give credit where it's due.

Not a big Cameron fan, but I certainly have to agree with the "spirit" of this proposal. Whether it is ever realised into reality is something I would expect to be boiled down to "political constipation". There is much too much finance influence in politics, and this won't go down easily.

I quite agree, it won't go down easily in fact some of the top execs are already squealing like pigs waiting to have their throats cut.
Cameron suggests allowing the shareholders to decide on exec bonuses which can often run into millions, even in cases of failure.
Given that amount of influence, I think many shareholders would be inclined to block such bonuses and exec.payrises altogether, so I imagine it will be difficult to strike the right balance, however it's only fair that the lesser shareholders, who have invested their hard earned cash in companies, be given a reasonable amount of influence and consideration rather than be constantly overuled or totally ignored which is often the case at present.

is that not part of the duties of the Non-Executive Director(s) ? ?

"Non-executive directors are expected to monitor and challenge the performance of the executive directors and the management, and to take a determined stand in the interests of the firm and its stakeholders."

http://www.businessdictionary.com/de...-director.html

Perhaps this is another case of already having a rule/law that isnt being used properly so we will make a new one.

IMO the NED's are too closely associated with the (in)actions of the executive board. However, many hold shares in the company so should have an interest.
They should never be given shares in (part) payment for their duties.

The High Speed rail from London to Birmingham has been approved. I won't comment on the rights and wrongs of it -I'm sure there are good arguments either way. But it is at least a welcome change to the short-termism that seems to have been endemic in Britain for many years. He's also driving it right through some of his chums constituencies so he can hardly be accused of cronyism.

£billions to knock a couple of mins off a rail journey that many cannot afford,
will the new line get some sort of preference over the general line the common people will be using ??

Is this going to be EU funded in the same way as in Spain and France or will the good old British taxpayer stump up the lot as usual ??

Difficult to justify such expense and disruption for such a short stretch,even taking into account a possible further even more expensive northerly extension.
I think these hi-speed lines only come into their own on really long routes.
I would have thought the cash would be better spent on streamlining the present systems.

As for who will pay,... silly question really eh ?.

Cameron relies too much on big business for his party's funding to really have a go at them.

You're right there.

It will take 49 minutes to do the 100 miles from London to Birmingham - that's a tad over 120mph - so much for the much vaunted 250mph trains!

rhetorical really, we all know the answer, and unless Cameron decides to change his advisors and his mind then its highly likely the work will not go to a UK company (do we have any left capable?). There will be all the promises of setting up a company in the UK if they don't have one but the profits will be moved out of the UK before the work is completed.

now which company has a rail project in Saudi ?

Fast speed trains are to the detriment of small local stations which are actually what are needed. Happened in Spain and will happen in the UK.

So when these bankers and executives salaries are cut do you reckon everyone at the bottom will be better off

All the big listed companies are predominately owned by pension funds. These are managed by excessively overpaid fund managers. Are these managers really going to vote down pay? Firstly it's their mates and secondly they would have to reduce their own pay.
Any government has no chance against the system