What a shame that the likes of Tony Blair and tax
avoiding Peter Mandelson don`t concentrate on helping rid us of this callous
coalition of austerity-obsessed Tories and duplicitous Lib Dems, instead of
criticising Miliband for not being sufficiently pro-business. It beggars belief
that so much of our current business model is allowed to continue largely
unchallenged and unregulated, and even when Miliband did show true leadership
qualities, and give his party a boost in the polls by attacking what he rightly
called "predator capitalism", Blairite criticism continued.
The fact is that most people in this country
are fed up with the antics of profit-at-all-costs British business, and
disgusted when they see politicians cosying-up with multi-millionaire,
capitalist fat cats, who not only maximise their own massive pay by cutting
their workers` jobs and wages, but display extreme arrogance, shamelessness and,
of course, a refusal to accept that taxation is necessary for a civilised
society, where all pay their fair share. They even refuse to acknowledge the
debt their companies owe to the taxpayers` funding of their workers education
and health, not to mention the benefits corporations get from the security and
transport facilities paid for by the Treasury.
How typical of this wealth-obsessed society of
ours that, when a company like Tesco has what the media calls a "collapse in
profitability", the previous CEO blames, in his words, the "failure of
leadership" under his successor. Also nothing to do with Leahy, of course, was
the huge reputation Tesco gained for its use of aggressive tactics in acquiring
land and/or planning permission, its apparent lack of concern for the thousands
of local small companies it put out of business, its bullying of farmers and
suppliers, shareholder revolts over the obscene levels of executive pay, and the
company`s failure to pay a living wage to its employees. Then there`s the small
matter of how Leahy, for the majority of his tenure, did not have the stiff
competition of discount supermarkets waging a price war against his company.
But, of course, as the Star told us last week,
Leahy is far from being alone in his arrogance and blamelessness.(Morning
Star,28/01/15) Having forced most of the workforce to become "self-employed
contractors", founder of the Better Capital investment firm that owns City Link,
Jon Moulton, not only refused to take any responsibility for the small
contractor companies` staffing costs, but also denied Better Capital ever
intended to provide further funding. Happy to see taxpayers picking up the bill
for up to £4m in statutory redundancy payments, Moulton, naturally, and his
firm, are based in Guernsey, thereby avoiding paying taxes to the British
treasury.
Such arrogance and hubris clearly underscore
our business system today,and explain, too, the glaring inequality in society;
the problems of pay which is so low it leads to tax receipts falling, and
increased reliance on in-work benefits, and the increased poverty caused by
zero-hours contracts have much to do with this business model, where the size of
the obscene bonuses for the top jobs rely on increasing profits. As they know,
the easiest way to do this is to lower labour costs, regardless of the pain it
causes. Commentators like the Guardian`s Polly Toynbee have suggested "restoring
power to unions" as a solution, but why not go further and follow the German
example of co-determination, which involves workers` representatives in the
running of companies, including the determining of pay levels? It`s certainly a
way to avoid the situation like we have today in this country where
excessive pay, with CEOs in the FTSE 100 earning
143 times the average amount paid to their workers, is far too commonplace. It
is rather disingenuous of the director-general of the CBI, John Cridland, to be
saying that the business community understood it had a "responsibility to help
people earn more". Yet more arrogance! Are we not expected to know that
he oversees businesses which are refusing to invest the £500bn they possess in
the economy, and that in his end-of-year report, Cridland said his hopes for the
EU included less "lifestyle regulation such as the working time directive",
which translates into bosses having free rein to increase the length of the
working day. What a pity he doesn`t concentrate on emphasising how all companies
should be paying at least the living wage to all employees, or ending their tax
avoidance policies, currently costing the country around £40bn a
year. They already pay a corporation tax 5%
lower than in any of the G7 countries, and eighteen points lower than in the
United States.
Then there are the bankers! Banking`s reputation is deservedly at an all time low: profit the
prime motive, scams devised to trick customers and rig interest and exchange
rates, highest pay to those employed in the least socially valuable aspect of
the business, with obscene bonuses and payment their reward, lowest pay possible
to those responsible for the daily running of the company and scant regard paid
to trade unions and workers` rights, increased "efficiency" equating to
thousands of job cuts, and, of course, yet again, maximum effort utilised to
ensure as little of the profit goes to the government in the form of taxation.
Such "irresponsible capitalism" may lead to many declarations by CEOs intent on
transforming the culture, but "ethics" remain way behind profits in the pecking
order, even lower than customer satisfaction. Indeed, one such practitioner of
bad practice has been forced to admit, if its recent advertising campaign is
evidence to judge it by, that its role as football league sponsor is more likely
to win new customers rather than its damaged reputation as custodian of
savings. Despite such practices of "predator capitalism", the public is
constantly, and has been since the 2010 election, inundated with
propaganda about "private" being superior to "public", and that this business
model is the one to follow! What was it again, which caused the economic crash
in the first place? Owen Jones recently quoted a Bloomberg editorial which said
that behind every "irresponsible borrower" is an "irresponsible lender", and we
all know who the latter are!
State
education, whilst imperfect in many ways, was enjoying examination success, with
results in many schools even rivalling, sometimes surpassing, those of the
private sector; universities were accessible to pupils from all levels of
society, because the A-level examinations were structured, with coursework,
modules and resit availability, all designed to maximise potential and
opportunity.Yet changes came, not only with widespread assessment "reforms", but
also with the organisation of schools mirroring "big business" of all things,
with pay for the headteacher four or five times the level awarded for classroom
expertise, union rights and pensions reduced, and the totally inappropriate
Performance Related Pay mooted for state education. At university level, more of
the failed banking business model; even in times of government enforced
austerity, vice-chancellors receive massive boosts to pay, whilst their
institutions` student intakes are falling, lecturers` rates frozen, and student
fees trebled. Yet the people whose work ensures university life continues as
normal, the cleaners,cooks and such-like, are exploited to such an extent,
industrial action is often their only option.
Even the BBC, once the world leader in
television and radio programming, lauded for its outside broadcasts and
universally acclaimed for its creativity, is now
subjected to similar business methods, cost-cutting whilst simultaneously
over-paying at the top, over-generous golden handshakes, muddled management
structures, and largely unimaginative in its output.
So no, Blairites, we do not want a Labour
party in hock to big business and in cahoots with fat cat tax avoiders, but one
which pledges to change the country`s business model into one respecting the
rights of workers and trade unions. As the Greek election showed us, people do
not want to be ruled by politicians intent on maintaining the status quo, or
even on tinkering at the edges, but by those advocating wholesale
change.
No comments:
Post a Comment