Errrrrrrrrmmmmmmmm no they didn't Cameron and his lap-dog have been eager to blame the last administration for awarding contracts to RBS executives that prevented the major shareholder, us, from having any say in the bonus awards to Philip Hester and his mates. The only problem with that appears to be that there's nothing in the contracts that prevents the biggest shareholder from having a say in the matter. In the section on bonuses, the contract states: "The executive [Mr Hester] may, at the discretion of the Remuneration Committee, be entitled to participate in any Bonus Scheme as approved by the Remuneration Committee, the terms of which may, at the sole discretion of the Remuneration Committee, require the Executive to defer a proportion of any bonus awarded to him." Sources at RBS confirmed that the Remuneration Committee's recommendations had to be put to a full vote of shareholders at the annual general meeting, which the Government controls. Although that vote is advisory, the source confirmed it would be "inconceivable" that the Government's wishes would not be followed. The contract and RBS's position would appear to be at odds with comments by Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg on the issue. So, it's all round to Phil's for cocktails then eh? If Miliband does not tear Cameron a new arsehole at today's PMQs, he should resign in shame.

Errrrrrrrrmmmmmmmm no they didn't Cameron and his lap-dog have been eager to blame the last administration for awarding contracts to RBS executives that prevented the major shareholder, us, from having any say in the bonus awards to Philip Hester and his mates. The only problem with that appears to be that there's nothing in the contracts that prevents the biggest shareholder from having a say in the matter. In the section on bonuses, the contract states: "The executive [Mr Hester] may, at the discretion of the Remuneration Committee, be entitled to participate in any Bonus Scheme as approved by the Remuneration Committee, the terms of which may, at the sole discretion of the Remuneration Committee, require the Executive to defer a proportion of any bonus awarded to him." Sources at RBS confirmed that the Remuneration Committee's recommendations had to be put to a full vote of shareholders at the annual general meeting, which the Government controls. Although that vote is advisory, the source confirmed it would be "inconceivable" that the Government's wishes would not be followed. The contract and RBS's position would appear to be at odds with comments by Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg on the issue. So, it's all round to Phil's for cocktails then eh? If Miliband does not tear Cameron a new arsehole at today's PMQs, he should resign in shame.

cod'ead wrote:Errrrrrrrrmmmmmmmm no they didn't Cameron and his lap-dog have been eager to blame the last administration for awarding contracts to RBS executives that prevented the major shareholder, us, from having any say in the bonus awards to Philip Hester and his mates. The only problem with that appears to be that there's nothing in the contracts that prevents the biggest shareholder from having a say in the matter. In the section on bonuses, the contract states: "The executive [Mr Hester] may, at the discretion of the Remuneration Committee, be entitled to participate in any Bonus Scheme as approved by the Remuneration Committee, the terms of which may, at the sole discretion of the Remuneration Committee, require the Executive to defer a proportion of any bonus awarded to him." Sources at RBS confirmed that the Remuneration Committee's recommendations had to be put to a full vote of shareholders at the annual general meeting, which the Government controls. Although that vote is advisory, the source confirmed it would be "inconceivable" that the Government's wishes would not be followed. The contract and RBS's position would appear to be at odds with comments by Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg on the issue. So, it's all round to Phil's for cocktails then eh? If Miliband does not tear Cameron a new arsehole at today's PMQs, he should resign in shame. Sadly, he'll probably come off second best again. I desperately want the Labour party to get its act together, but they're an absolute shambles at the moment. From Milliband failing miserably as a leader, to my own MP (Caroline Flint) not even bothering to respond to an email I sent her nearly a month ago, they've nothing to recommend them to voters - even the ones desperate to vote for them. If there was an election tomorrow, I'd have to vote Green.

cod'ead wrote:Errrrrrrrrmmmmmmmm no they didn't Cameron and his lap-dog have been eager to blame the last administration for awarding contracts to RBS executives that prevented the major shareholder, us, from having any say in the bonus awards to Philip Hester and his mates. The only problem with that appears to be that there's nothing in the contracts that prevents the biggest shareholder from having a say in the matter. In the section on bonuses, the contract states: "The executive [Mr Hester] may, at the discretion of the Remuneration Committee, be entitled to participate in any Bonus Scheme as approved by the Remuneration Committee, the terms of which may, at the sole discretion of the Remuneration Committee, require the Executive to defer a proportion of any bonus awarded to him." Sources at RBS confirmed that the Remuneration Committee's recommendations had to be put to a full vote of shareholders at the annual general meeting, which the Government controls. Although that vote is advisory, the source confirmed it would be "inconceivable" that the Government's wishes would not be followed. The contract and RBS's position would appear to be at odds with comments by Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg on the issue. So, it's all round to Phil's for cocktails then eh? If Miliband does not tear Cameron a new arsehole at today's PMQs, he should resign in shame. Sadly, he'll probably come off second best again. I desperately want the Labour party to get its act together, but they're an absolute shambles at the moment. From Milliband failing miserably as a leader, to my own MP (Caroline Flint) not even bothering to respond to an email I sent her nearly a month ago, they've nothing to recommend them to voters - even the ones desperate to vote for them. If there was an election tomorrow, I'd have to vote Green.

Ed's finished. Even his shadow front bench were openlt criticising him over the Welfare Bill fiasco.

The Tories are steaming agead in the polls.

Labour has no coherency. It's finished for years without a new leader and a big dose of common sense.

Who should suceed him, is his brother upto it? I quite like Ed Balls, I think he would give Cameron et al a run for their money.

The fact that they are trying to blame Labour tells us that they are not keen on curbing bonuses at all and therefore all the hot air and bluster from Cameron about overpay is shallow and empty ... but they know it won't be popular, so they have decided to just add another lie to the long list of lies they have run up in a very short time.

cod'ead wrote:Errrrrrrrrmmmmmmmm no they didn't buggers is the remuneration committee made up of non-executive directors. The very sort I was whinging about on here a few weeks ago. Who get their jobs form the directors that they then vote to get bonuses on? http://www.rbs.com/about-rbs/g1/our-board.ashx Oh yes it is. Found them. Four of these lovely people with Penny Hughes CBE as the Chair.

cod'ead wrote:Errrrrrrrrmmmmmmmm no they didn't buggers is the remuneration committee made up of non-executive directors. The very sort I was whinging about on here a few weeks ago. Who get their jobs form the directors that they then vote to get bonuses on? http://www.rbs.com/about-rbs/g1/our-board.ashx Oh yes it is. Found them. Four of these lovely people with Penny Hughes CBE as the Chair.

The problem with Ed Balls is he is tainted goods.

Within the confines of the Commons, Balls is probably regarded as a troublesome opponent by Tories because he is an aggressive arguer, he is relentless and pins ministers down on issues, and he has a good background in economics so he picks people up when they try to make unfounded claims.

However with the wider public Balls is seen rightly or wrongly as Gordon Brown's lapdog, a symbol of the worst of the factionalism which drove the Labour party to eat itself during the Blair v Brown years. Balls has also made a lot of enemies within the Labour party. So the Tories response to Balls is usually not to counter his arguments, which are usually quite strong, but to mock his image or lack of popularity.

Like Ed Miliband, Balls is not Prime Minister material. Ed Miliband because he comes over as a bit of a drip, Balls because he comes over as someone a bit unlikeable and an ambitious plotter.

David Miliband would be streets ahead of both of them. As for the other candidates there are not many at the moment. Yvette Cooper would be a strong leader but I'm not sure how Ed would feel about playing second fiddle to her. He may recognise that his own chances are negligible and second best is to get his wife to do the job. But then it all makes the Labour party seem very much a family affair, the Miliband brothers and Mr and Mrs Balls. A lot of commentators are tipping Chuka Ummuna or Rachel Reeves to be future leaders but as MPs from the 2010 intake I think it would be at least 2017 before either of them could be leader so I think there will be a leader before them.

The outside bet would be Alastair Darling, he is out of the scene at the moment but said he wouldn't rule out making a return to the front bench in time, and I think he is doing what David Miliband is doing, recognising that the Labour party is in a mess at the moment and disassociating himself so he can be relatively untainted when he comes back. Although Darling might not seem like a dynamic Blair or Cameron figure, he has the benefit of being fairly normal and considering he was Chancellor through a difficult time he accredited himself quite well and was received well by the public. I know people will use the 'boring' tag against him but I don't think boring is a bad image when voters are suspicious of spin and bull...Darling was the one that Brown tried to censor from telling things like they were when the financial crisis started.

The problem Labour have is not just Balls but that they have no balls.

Their only hope is be brave and radical in their thinking. Nuanced differences to the present government are pointless. The idea that Labour support cuts but then moan about every one is a ridiculous and two-faced position and potential voters see that. They are not gaining votes or even limiting damage by such a stance. The idea that you can make big cuts without causing pain or upsetting some / all people is simply daft. The government are at least being coherent - they see cuts as necessay and are going about the job. As they "promised" they are setting about changing Britain forever. Whether or not that will prove a good thing or not, time will tell.

And he duly did. He should have one of the easiest jobs in decades as opposition leader in a time of hardship and financial crisis but he repeatedly fails to take advantage. Worst leader since Foot IMO.


Must admit I'd be in a similar position. Which would really test my resolve as far as always taking part in elections goes.

Isn't the problem here that our elections have become presidential rather than party politically based?

Cameron is popular because he has great PR and is even to tell outright lies and go up in the polls. Meanwhile the actual job of government is being done by the likes of Willets, Gove and Lansey who are making a right ideologically driven mess of it. We even have unsavoury characters like Eric Pickles in positions of power.

I think the likes of Cooper, Burnham and Balls would do a far better job but people seem unable see past the weakness of Ed Milliband.

I remember years ago being astonished my brother in law and his wife were going to vote Tory because they considered John Major a strong leader. My response was but what about all the policies his government will implement that will make you and the country worse off in numerous ways (which is what happened with people left on trolley's in hospital wards etc and a botched privatisation of the railways he himself has admitted was rushed through etc)?

It seems history is repeating itself and people will either not vote Labour or even vote Tory ignoring what doing so will actually mean. A outright majority government made up of some of the most right wing neo-con politicians we have ever had the misfortune to have around.

Labout ought to be able to put up a stuffed pig as leader and still wipe the floor at an election given the mess this government is making but instead it seems that they have to have a poster boy with a background in PR.