First posted on the original Lobby Group blog by contributor Coral Bloom-
I don’t know if this will matter to anyone, but it seems John Prescott has launched a campaign against the bank bonus payments.
His website hasn’t come through via Google yet, but according to the lunchtime news, it has been launched somewhere.
Contact your local elected officials - for free
by OldNick666
09 Feb 2009 at 06:27
It seems that he whole country is up in arms about this now so it doesn’t seem worth spending our energies on the level of present bonuses. I would rather we direct our energies at educating people about the futility and hazards of the bonus culture so that we can move to a better future.
The danger is that after the depression people will slide back into the old practices that caused the problems. I think we need to challenge the fundamentals of current thinking.
See my posts about bonuses under other headings.
by Albion
09 Feb 2009 at 14:05
It’s not just bank bonus payments. Did anyone hear Noel Edmonds passionate speech about the press officer at the district council who refused planning permission for the specially adapted house for the injured Marine?
The cheer that went up when he described this council representative as an example of what was wrong with Britain today, and reminding them that they were public servants was met with quite a cheer from the audience.
I think that there’s growing public opinion that the entire system needs an overhaul, and that councillors and MPs need to remember just why they are where they are, and what they’re supposed to do….
by OldNick666
09 Feb 2009 at 14:24
A start to overhauling the system.
Was it Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy that said the last people who should be in charge are those who want to be in charge.
Some of the very important decisions made in public service are made by juries. I gather that generally people take this service very seriously.
Why can we not run our parliament and our councils in like manner? Service would be compulsory, well paid and for a limited period – say 6 months. Those serving would need the advice of the civil service etc.
This idea would need to be developed but I am sure most problems could be resolved. After all the present system is not without problems.
by CoralBloom
09 Feb 2009 at 14:38
This isn’t a government issue alone.
Western country around 1998, there was a tornado. It went straight over a strip maul.
The manager of a national org gathered up his staff and customers in the huge store, along with those in other shops/carpark etc. He took them into the solid concrete walk-in freezer, not having a basement.
The entire shop was flattened except the concret freezer. Many were saved to national aclaim.
The head office, on hearing the story broadcast over the country, sent the hero manager a letter informing him he had been fired – org policy said no member of the public should ever enter the concrete freezer.
That cause national outrage. His was not given his job back. Rules are rules, end of, and the org would not back down. The hero was offered better work by many others.
These aren’t moral issues.
These aren’t governments being got at by rich friends.
These aren’t about anything than a complete lack of common sense and human decency at the end of the day.
Would these decisions happen in Switzerland with a very different form of democracy?
by kooltidings
10 Feb 2009 at 00:36
Did any of you her Obama’s comment about his new stimulus group. He said he was having people who were economists and people ‘who thought they were economist’ because in this day and age ‘everyone think they’re an economist’
by Jambo
11 Feb 2009 at 13:09
Other lobbying being carried out by Nicholas Nassim Taleb and Nouriel Roubini:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=51818722129
Basically they’re arguing that in order to prevent huge Moral Hazard the most important step is to Reclaim PAST banker bonus’ not prevent new ones.
by CoralBloom
11 Feb 2009 at 13:22
OldNick666
1. Industry would be up in arms at the loss of key individuals.
2. NHS letter, saying sorry, we couldn’t find a temp to replace your oncologist….
3. I’ve heard quite a few people voice the following opinion (and I stress this is not mine); those who wish to have children may only be allowed to do so on the condition that they have passed an exam to prove they have enough brains to be a parent. So what level of qualificcation would be required to sit on government for 6 months?
Could just make all representatives live on a council state for one year prior to standing for election….. that’ll slap it into them. And yes, defending your seat would still require 1 year on a council estate, with the same income (legitimate, of course) as you neighbours, from the same types of jobs.
by OldNick666
12 Feb 2009 at 01:58
CoralBloom
Exactly the same conditions that apply to jury service where a trial may last 6 months or more.
Unfair – maybe. Part of ones obligation resulting from being a member of society?
There being no opposing parties so 200 sitting at a time would probably be more that adequate. After all a Jury manages with just 12.
If the pace of legislation is slowed would that be a bad thing?