Sunday, October 30, 2011
Eurozone Bailout Deal
by Stephen Lendman
One size fits all doesn’t work. Uniting 17 dissimilar countries under rigid euro rules failed.
Membership means foregoing the right to devalue currencies to make exports more competitive, maintain money sovereignty to monetize debt freely, and legislate fiscal policy to stimulate growth.
Eurozone’s obituary remains to be written. It’s just a matter of time.
Maastricht criteria limit inflation, long-term interest rates, budget deficits, and government debt. Granting money power to a supranational authority flopped. Globalists want it anyway. Wrecking economies to enrich bankers matters most.
The euro’s 1999 introduction prevented the European Central Bank (ECB) from financing government deficits. Eurozone members can’t monetize credit. Their public sector is “dependent on commercial banks and bondholders,” explains Michael Hudson.
It’s a “bonanza for them, rolling back three centuries of attempts to create a mixed economy financially and industrially, by privatizing the credit creation monopoly as well as capital investment in public infrastructure monopolies now being pushed onto the sales block for bidders – on credit, with the winner being the one who promises to pay out the most interest to bankers to absorb the access fees (economic rent) that can be extracted.”
As a result, nations were financialized and economies privatized. “Financial oligarchy” replaced democracy. Wealth more than ever is concentrated in private hands. Banker rules force selling off public land and enterprises.
Austerity demands public sector layoffs, wage and benefit cuts, and unrestrained economic freedom, unfettered of rules, regulations, onerous taxes, and trade barriers.
Governments work best by getting out of the way to give private business free reign. Financialized economies empower bankers most of all. Money power in private hands and democracy can’t coexist.
Troubled Eurozone countries now suffer most. Throwing good money after bad delays decision day at the price of far greater trouble on arrival.
Greece highlights what other debt entrapped countries face, including bankruptcy, mass impoverishment, and growing anger threatening revolution.
Pledging an “ambitious and comprehensive” debt crisis solution, Eurozone leaders sold out to bankers.
Europe’s debt problem is too great to solve. Throwing good money after bad compounds it. Eastern Europe is deeply troubled. Greece, Portugal, Ireland, Italy and Spain owe up to $6 trillion.
Allegedly less than one-fourth was pledged, but sketchy details leave many unanswered questions. European debt is triple the size of Germany’s economy. Its banking giants are insolvent. So are France’s. Solutions tried so far failed. Wednesday’s deal may be worst of all.
On November 23, a congressional “Super Committee” must agree on $1.2 trillion in spending cuts. Republicans won’t raise taxes. Democrats oppose greater social safety net cuts.
Without resolution, automatic cuts will result. Ordinary Americans will be hit hardest. Any steps taken won’t solve out-of-control deficits. Disruptions and dislocations are assured.
For the first time ever, Western societies face default. Eurozone unity is crumbling. Major banks face bankruptcy. Political solutions assure greater trouble. Rage against the system grows.
Bailouts accomplish nothing. Ordinary people suffer most. The mother of all train wrecks approaches. On arrival, it’ll be too big to ignore or resolve without consequences no one wants to consider.
Economist David Rosenberg called the Eurozone deal “tentative,” involving 100 billion euro bailout for Greece. Allegedly it includes a 50% debt haircut, but suspicions are that bookkeeping entries may end up shifting it from one account to another so bankers get off easier than announced.
With leverage, a pledged overall 250 – 275 euro package implies 1.375 trillion euros for troubled Eurozone economies. If Italy needs help, as expected, it’s not nearly enough to cover its debt burden.
Where funds come from isn’t clear. Voluntary public and private investor participation is needed. Who’ll provide it isn’t known, especially with fears of throwing good money after bad.
Moreover, clear details are lacking, and 17 Eurozone countries must agree to go along. Bailing out Greece is one thing. What if Portugal, Italy and Spain follow. Healthy countries like Germany haven’t enough money for it without wrecking their economies and raising public anger higher than now.
In addition, doubts are being raised. The Financial Times (FT) questioned “optimistic assumptions” about Greek privatization revenues raised.
Under the best scenario, substantial risks remain. FT headlined, “Eurozone bailout: the blogosphere’s verdict,” saying:
the Wall Street Journal Europe Source blog called the deal “too little too late to keep Italy out of the crosshairs of financial markets and open the next battle in the struggle to save the euro;”
“FT Alphaville” worried about projecting Greece’s debt still at a troubling 120% of GDP in a decade under assumptions too optimistic to meet;
some analysts can’t distinguish between smoke and mirrors and reality in the announced package;
stagnant growth worries Germany’s Die Welt commentator Gunther Lachmann, saying the deal omits ways to create jobs and achieve prosperity;
Germany’s business daily Handelsblatt said the agreement creates problems Germans wanted to avoid; and
other critics see nothing good ahead for troubled Eurozone countries; at best, only their day of reckoning was delayed.
Regular Progressive Radio News Hour contributor Bob Chapman expressed great skepticism about a workable policy response, saying:
“All the lies of the past two weeks by various European governments and bureaucrats, as well as Sarkozy and Merkel, were just delaying tactics to attempt to find a solution to Europe’s financial dilemma.”
In his judgment, they don’t have one, headlines notwithstanding.
On October 28, Naked Capitalism headlined, “Grand European Rescue Already Starting to Come Unglued?” saying:
Analysts worry about wrecking economies to save banks. Other issues include an inadequate “rescue fund, heavy reliance on smoke and gimmickry to get it to that size, insufficient relief” for Greece, doubts about whether “banks will go along with the ‘voluntary’ rescue, and way too many details left to be sorted out.”
In addition, “haircuts will apply to only a portion of (Greek) bonds” if enforced. Smoke and mirrors manipulation suggests not, or at least not as announced.
Moreover, troubled banks in greater trouble from haircuts will get bailout help to compensate.
About one-third of Greece’s 350 billion debt is held by private international investors. The ECB, IMF and sovereign governments hold another third. The remainder is held by Greek and Cypriot banks and the Greek Social Fund.
If half of Greece’s debt is written off, the nation’s pension funds will lose 12 billion euros. As a result, they’ll face bankruptcy. At the same time, Greek and other banks need hundreds of billions of euros to survive. Some need even more. Patchwork bailouts only delay their day of reckoning.
Even the ECB is skeptical about a flawed deal. Bundesbank president Jens Weidmann expressed alarm about leverage “without putting any new money into the pot.”
China and other BRIC countries are being courted to help. None will without compensating benefits. Eurozone countries must contribute most. A workable package is key. What’s known makes a bad situation worse. China’s got its own problems. Will it exacerbate them by bearing some of Europe’s burden?
Most troubling is throwing good money after bad. Greater trouble ahead is assured. Out-of-control debt isn’t resolved by more of it.
Neither is repeating failed policies and expecting a different outcome.
Reality differs greatly from hope. European officials met 20 times this year alone because nothing tried so far worked.
Bond investors reacted negatively to their latest deal. They usually have the last word.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
Court stops fast-track bailout fund committee
Germany's top court Friday stopped a new fast-track committee appointed to approve emergency measures to tackle the eurozone crisis, potentially slowing decisions by the eurozone paymaster.
- Bad bank finds €56 bln after checking sums (29 Oct 11)
- Rubbish law aims to boost recycling (28 Oct 11)
- Merkel: No apology to Berlusconi for smirk (27 Oct 11)
The ruling, which says only parliament can approve such measures, is temporary pending a definitive decision by the tribunal.
The Bundestag lower house had only created the panel, comprised of members of all the parties in parliament, on Wednesday with the aim of allowing Germany to take quicker action to fight the crisis.
It was to have started work behind closed doors on Friday.
In particular, the committee would have been able to green-light decisions on the use of the €440 billion EFSF bailout fund for debt-wracked European nations, such as buying bonds or aiding threatened banks.
In early September the Court gave parliament a bigger say in decisions on saving the euro. The decision raised concerns that it would slow Germany's reaction in crisis situations when speed is vital.
The head of the EFSF himself, Klaus Regling, had insisted on Germany creating a rapid-response body to head off turmoil while markets await action.
Depending on the urgency of the measures, the entire Bundestag, the 41-member budgetary committee or the nine-member panel would have been tasked with providing approval.
But the Court said the panel could threaten parliament's sovereignty on budgetary issues, a "possible violation of the law" that could not be reversed if breached because Germany would have made "commitments that are binding under international law."
The chief whip for Chancellor Angela Merkel's conservative Christian Democrats, Peter Altmeier, said that despite the ruling, parliament would make sure the EFSF could be activated when needed.
"The German Bundestag will ensure that until a final ruling is made, Germany's ability to take action and the ability of the European rescue fund to be used will be ensured at all times," he told reporters. "We will, if necessary, take quick and effective action."
But government sources told news agency DPA that the preliminary verdict would slow decisions on the EFSF and open the door to speculators exploiting the gaps before measures can be taken.
Government spokesman Steffen Seibert said he would not comment on an ongoing judicial review but pledged the administration would continue to work closely with parliament according to the tenets of the country's Basic Law.
When asked when a final decision could be expected from the Court – something observers said could take months – finance ministry spokesman Martin Kotthaus told a briefing: "We can only hope it will be soon."
Despite occasional grumbling among members of her coalition, Merkel has
never failed to win strong majorities for parliamentary decisions on eurozone crisis measures.
AFP/mdm
Doctors: Scott Olsen suffered brain damage and is unable to speak
Scott Olsen, 24, was said to be otherwise lucid and able to communicate with his family by writing notes, but his ability to spell is also damaged, according to sources who spoke with The Guardian. He is, however, able to understand what’s being communicated to him.
Keith Shannon, Olsen’s roommate who served with him in Iraq, explained that “He cannot talk right now, and that is because the fracture is right on the speech center of his brain,” the paper added. “However, they are expecting he will get that back.”
Olsen is believed to have been struck in the forehead by a police projectile, and many speculate it was either a tear gas canister or a beanbag full of lead fired from a shotgun. Both can be lethal at close range, although many police departments use them as “non-lethal” weapons. Video from the scene seems to show him being struck by a tear gas canister fired from just a few feet away, but the image is not clear.
The blow was so severe that doctors were forced to place Olsen in a medically-induced coma to help fight swelling on his brain.
The two-tour Iraq veteran has since become a flashpoint for the 99 Percent movement, who’ve seemingly been targeted for police harassment in most major cities.
In response to Tuesday’s events, the general assembly at “Occupy Oakland” has called for a city-wide general strike on Nov. 2, aimed at shutting down city services for one day to protest police violence.
Oakland Mayor Jean Quon, who authorized the eviction, has since distanced herself from the police chief, saying on Friday “I only asked the chief to do one thing: to do it when it was the safest for both the police and the demonstrators.” Current TV’s Keith Olbermann has called on her to go further than pass the blame: he wants Mayor Quon to fire the police chief or resign. There’s no indication that she plans to do either.
Since the violence she’s also claimed to support the 99 Percent movement and withdrawn much of the police presence near the park where protesters had been camping.
Olsen may still face brain surgery, but doctors haven’t determined whether that’s necessary just yet.
Egyptians march from Tahrir Square to support Occupy Oakland protestors
As they vowed earlier this week to do, Egyptian pro-democracy protesters marched from Tahrir square to the U.S. Embassy today to march in support of Occupy Oakland—and against the type of police brutality witnessed in Oakland on Tuesday night, and commonly experienced in Egypt.
tahrir-oakland-fuck-polic...
In this post, photos from Egyptian blogger Mohammed Maree, who is there at the march live-tweeting these snapshots. He is a journalist with Egytimes.org, a human rights activist, and a veterinarian; all photos are his.
The larger demonstration back at Tahrir was about issues closer to home: Egyptians are demanding that the military transfer power quickly to a representative civilian government, after the death by torture of a 24-year-old political prisoner named Essam Ali Atta. As the Guardian reports, critics say his death proves that the junta is failing to dismantle Mubarak's brutal security apparatus:
The larger demonstration back at Tahrir was about issues closer to home: Egyptians are demanding that the military transfer power quickly to a representative civilian government, after the death by torture of a 24-year-old political prisoner named Essam Ali Atta. As the Guardian reports, critics say his death proves that the junta is failing to dismantle Mubarak's brutal security apparatus:
Essam Ali Atta, a civilian serving a two-year jail term in Cairo's high-security Tora prison following his conviction in a military tribunal earlier this year for an apparently "common crime", was reportedly attacked by prison guards after trying to smuggle a mobile phone sim card into his cell. According to statements from other prisoners who witnessed the assault, Atta had large water hoses repeatedly forced into his mouth and anus on more than one occasion, causing severe internal bleeding. An officer then transferred Atta to a central Cairo hospital, but he died within an hour.His funeral took place today. Follow live tweets from the memorial at #esamatta. Journalist Reem Abdellatif, who is there, tweets:
His sister just passed out screaming they took my brother from me. [photo]. The scene is devastating at the morgue #essamatta's mom and sister keep calling out to him like he's still alive. Essam was 24.As some protesters noted, that is exactly the same age as Scott Olsen, the US vet injured at Occupy Oakland. They see both men as victims of state brutality.
§
tahrir-oakland-dont-afrai...
tahrir-oakland-same-goal....
New Veterans Hit Hard by Economic Crisis
After a mortar sent Andrew Spurlock hurtling off a roof in Iraq, ending his Army career in 2006, the seasoned infantryman set aside bitterness over his back injury and began to chart his life in storybook fashion: a new house, a job as a police officer and more children.
“We had a budget and a plan,” said Mr. Spurlock, 29, a father of three, who with his wife, Michelle, hoped to avoid the pitfalls of his transition from Ramadi, Iraq, to Apopka, Fla.
But the move proved treacherous, as it often does for veterans. The job with the Orange County Sheriff’s Office fell through after officials there told Mr. Spurlock that he needed to “decompress” after two combat tours, a judgment that took him by surprise. Scrambling, he settled for a job delivering pizzas.
Mr. Spurlock’s disability claim for his back injury took 18 months to process, a year longer than expected. With little choice, the couple began putting mortgage payments on credit cards. The family debt climbed to $60,000, a chunk of it for medical bills, including for his wife and child. Foreclosure seemed certain.
While few Americans are sheltered from the jolt of the recent economic crisis, the nation’s newest veterans, particularly the wounded, are being hit especially hard. The triple-whammy of injury, unemployment and waiting for disability claims to be processed has forced many veterans into foreclosure, or sent them teetering on its edge, according to veterans’ organizations.
The problem is hard to quantify because there are no foreclosure statistics singling out veterans and service members. Congress recently asked the Veterans Affairs Department to find out how badly veterans were being affected, particularly by foreclosures. The Army, too, began tracking requests for help on foreclosure issues for the first time. Service organizations report that requests for help from military personnel and new veterans, especially those who were wounded, mentally or physically, and are struggling to keep their houses and pay their bills, has jumped sharply.
“The demand curve has gone almost straight up this year,” said Bill Nelson, executive director for USA Cares, a nonprofit group that provides financial help to members of the military and to veterans. Housing, Mr. Nelson said, “is the biggest driver in the last 12 months.”
Congress has recently taken small steps to help, banning lenders from foreclosing on military personnel for nine months after their return from overseas, up from three months, and ensuring that interest rates on their loans remain stable for a year. Another relief bill to prevent certain injured veterans from losing their homes while they wait for their disability money was signed into law in October. The protection is good for one year.
“We owe these men and women more than a pat on the back,” said Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, who introduced one of the bills.
But the short-term measures do little to address the underlying economic difficulties that new veterans face, beginning with the job hunt. Veterans, particularly those in their 20s, have faced higher unemployment rates in recent years than those who never served in the military, though the gap has shrunk as the economy has worsened. (Veterans traditionally have lower unemployment rates than nonveterans.)
Recently discharged veterans, though, fared worst of all. A 2007 survey for the Veterans Affairs Department of 1,941 combat veterans who left the military mostly in 2005 showed nearly 18 percent were unemployed as of last year. The average national jobless rate in October was 6.5 percent.
A quarter of those who found jobs failed to make a living wage, earning less than $21,840 a year.
“You fill out a job application and you can’t write ‘long-range reconnaissance and sniper skills,’ ” said Mr. Spurlock, who searched a year for a better-paying job than delivering pizza, finally finding one as a construction supervisor.
The situation is especially troubling for the injured, whose financial problems begin almost immediately.
“The wife drops everything to be by his bedside,” said Meredith Leyva, founder of Operation Homefront, a nonprofit group that provides emergency money and aid to 33,000 military families a year, including the Spurlocks. “She stays at the nearest hotel to make sure he is alive. They live that way for months. She either has to quit her job or she is fired. This bankrupts people.”
“We had a budget and a plan,” said Mr. Spurlock, 29, a father of three, who with his wife, Michelle, hoped to avoid the pitfalls of his transition from Ramadi, Iraq, to Apopka, Fla.
But the move proved treacherous, as it often does for veterans. The job with the Orange County Sheriff’s Office fell through after officials there told Mr. Spurlock that he needed to “decompress” after two combat tours, a judgment that took him by surprise. Scrambling, he settled for a job delivering pizzas.
Mr. Spurlock’s disability claim for his back injury took 18 months to process, a year longer than expected. With little choice, the couple began putting mortgage payments on credit cards. The family debt climbed to $60,000, a chunk of it for medical bills, including for his wife and child. Foreclosure seemed certain.
While few Americans are sheltered from the jolt of the recent economic crisis, the nation’s newest veterans, particularly the wounded, are being hit especially hard. The triple-whammy of injury, unemployment and waiting for disability claims to be processed has forced many veterans into foreclosure, or sent them teetering on its edge, according to veterans’ organizations.
The problem is hard to quantify because there are no foreclosure statistics singling out veterans and service members. Congress recently asked the Veterans Affairs Department to find out how badly veterans were being affected, particularly by foreclosures. The Army, too, began tracking requests for help on foreclosure issues for the first time. Service organizations report that requests for help from military personnel and new veterans, especially those who were wounded, mentally or physically, and are struggling to keep their houses and pay their bills, has jumped sharply.
“The demand curve has gone almost straight up this year,” said Bill Nelson, executive director for USA Cares, a nonprofit group that provides financial help to members of the military and to veterans. Housing, Mr. Nelson said, “is the biggest driver in the last 12 months.”
Congress has recently taken small steps to help, banning lenders from foreclosing on military personnel for nine months after their return from overseas, up from three months, and ensuring that interest rates on their loans remain stable for a year. Another relief bill to prevent certain injured veterans from losing their homes while they wait for their disability money was signed into law in October. The protection is good for one year.
“We owe these men and women more than a pat on the back,” said Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, who introduced one of the bills.
But the short-term measures do little to address the underlying economic difficulties that new veterans face, beginning with the job hunt. Veterans, particularly those in their 20s, have faced higher unemployment rates in recent years than those who never served in the military, though the gap has shrunk as the economy has worsened. (Veterans traditionally have lower unemployment rates than nonveterans.)
Recently discharged veterans, though, fared worst of all. A 2007 survey for the Veterans Affairs Department of 1,941 combat veterans who left the military mostly in 2005 showed nearly 18 percent were unemployed as of last year. The average national jobless rate in October was 6.5 percent.
A quarter of those who found jobs failed to make a living wage, earning less than $21,840 a year.
“You fill out a job application and you can’t write ‘long-range reconnaissance and sniper skills,’ ” said Mr. Spurlock, who searched a year for a better-paying job than delivering pizza, finally finding one as a construction supervisor.
The situation is especially troubling for the injured, whose financial problems begin almost immediately.
“The wife drops everything to be by his bedside,” said Meredith Leyva, founder of Operation Homefront, a nonprofit group that provides emergency money and aid to 33,000 military families a year, including the Spurlocks. “She stays at the nearest hotel to make sure he is alive. They live that way for months. She either has to quit her job or she is fired. This bankrupts people.”
- 1
- 2
My pay is very low, moans advertising tycoon with a basic salary of £1 MILLION a year
One of Britain’s highest paid executives prompted outrage last night by insisting that his £1million basic salary is 'very low’.
Sir Martin Sorrell, head of advertising giant WPP, rejected criticism of executive pay in the wake of a study showing it rose by almost 50 per cent in the past year.
David Cameron described the huge increases commanded by bosses at a time when ordinary workers have had their incomes squeezed as 'disturbing’.
And Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said it was a 'slap in the face’ for employees, seizing on the astonishing rise as evidence that tax cuts for the low paid should take priority over scrapping the 50p top tax rate.
But Sir Martin, 66, said his bumper income, which rose by 83 per cent to £4.2million last year, was fully justified and was mostly linked to the firm’s performance.
He added that he considered his basic salary, of just over £1million, to be 'very low’.
But his comments astonished MPs and infuriated union leaders. Labour education spokesman Karen Buck described the huge rise in executive pay as 'grotesque’, adding: 'What planet do these people live on?’
Deborah Hargreaves, chair of the High Pay Commission which is looking into executives’ remuneration, said the performance-related pay deals enjoyed by executives 'don’t really work’.
Commenting on the study by the research group Income Data Services, she added: 'I think it is very hard to justify these sorts of pay increases when we have seen companies’ share prices go down, profits down, companies laying off staff, and when average wages are going up 1 or 2 per cent, not even keeping up with price rises.’
But in an interview with the Daily Mail, Sir Martin angrily defended his bumper pay packet.
He said: 'The only planet I am living on is looking at our company in terms of the competition – that’s the planet. We need to maintain a competitive position. The UK only accounts for 12 per cent of our business. We have more Brazilians, Russians, and Indians than we have Americans and Brits.
'In 2009 it was a tough year for us and compensation across the board fell. In 2010 we delivered record profit.
'People are not distinguishing between fixed pay and incentive pay. I don’t sell my stock. Other people, including our competitors, do. The value of the business has grown from £1million to £8.5billion over its life.’
However, there was little sympathy for him among ordinary workers outside WPP’s offices in West London last night.
One of the firm’s delivery men, who declined to give his name, said: 'To say that his salary is not very much is really insensitive. I’m not earning that much, no one is.’
Julian Chambers, a street cleaner working next to the building, said: 'I work here every day on minimum wage and I work weekends just to pay the bills. It’s been really hard even finding work during the past few years. It just shows how out of touch he must be.’
Yesterday’s report by the IDS showed pay among directors of Britain’s FTSE 100 companies had risen by 49 per cent last year. It now averages £3.8million.
The Prime Minister said the increase was 'not okay’ when millions were facing pay freezes and called for 'transparency, proper accountability and a sense of responsibility from boardrooms’.
And Bob Crow, leader of the Rail, Maritime and Transport workers’ union, said: 'The same top bosses demanding wage restraint and attacks on workers’ rights on the shop floor have been caught stuffing their own pockets in the boardroom.’
Sir Martin Sorrell, head of advertising giant WPP, rejected criticism of executive pay in the wake of a study showing it rose by almost 50 per cent in the past year.
David Cameron described the huge increases commanded by bosses at a time when ordinary workers have had their incomes squeezed as 'disturbing’.
High flying: Sir Martin Sorrell, pictured with his wife Lady Cristiana, said his pay as head of advertising giant WPP is very low
But Sir Martin, 66, said his bumper income, which rose by 83 per cent to £4.2million last year, was fully justified and was mostly linked to the firm’s performance.
He added that he considered his basic salary, of just over £1million, to be 'very low’.
Condemnation: Nick Clegg (left) and David Cameron have both said bumper pay rises for Britain's top bosses are unacceptable
Deborah Hargreaves, chair of the High Pay Commission which is looking into executives’ remuneration, said the performance-related pay deals enjoyed by executives 'don’t really work’.
But in an interview with the Daily Mail, Sir Martin angrily defended his bumper pay packet.
He said: 'The only planet I am living on is looking at our company in terms of the competition – that’s the planet. We need to maintain a competitive position. The UK only accounts for 12 per cent of our business. We have more Brazilians, Russians, and Indians than we have Americans and Brits.
'In 2009 it was a tough year for us and compensation across the board fell. In 2010 we delivered record profit.
'People are not distinguishing between fixed pay and incentive pay. I don’t sell my stock. Other people, including our competitors, do. The value of the business has grown from £1million to £8.5billion over its life.’
However, there was little sympathy for him among ordinary workers outside WPP’s offices in West London last night.
One of the firm’s delivery men, who declined to give his name, said: 'To say that his salary is not very much is really insensitive. I’m not earning that much, no one is.’
Yesterday’s report by the IDS showed pay among directors of Britain’s FTSE 100 companies had risen by 49 per cent last year. It now averages £3.8million.
The Prime Minister said the increase was 'not okay’ when millions were facing pay freezes and called for 'transparency, proper accountability and a sense of responsibility from boardrooms’.
And Bob Crow, leader of the Rail, Maritime and Transport workers’ union, said: 'The same top bosses demanding wage restraint and attacks on workers’ rights on the shop floor have been caught stuffing their own pockets in the boardroom.’
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)