Bernard Ginns: Revolutionaries couldn’t solve wealth gap, how can we?

So how much are you worth then?

That’s a question most non-journalists would be too polite to ask.

And I can tell you that it’s a question that most successful people would not care to answer.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

But like it or not, it reflects an issue that is moving inexorably up the political agenda.

In last week’s column, I predicted that Britain in 2012 would become an angrier place. To a large extent that will be due to the widening gap between rich and poor.

The story has moved onwards and upwards since then.

Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister, announced on Sunday that there must be a crackdown on “irresponsible and unjustifiable” pay in the private sector.

He added that the Government will publish proposals next month to bring greater transparency to the “closed shop of remuneration committees which seems to be too often an old boys’ network”. Note the choice of language subtly invoking class divisions. The Liberal Democrat MP for Sheffield Hallam said: “I believe that people should be well paid if they succeed.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“What I abhor is people who get paid bucketloads of cash in difficult times for failure.”

I asked the headhunter Martin Boyle, a Leeds-based partner at Howgate Sable, what he thought of Mr Clegg’s comments – and if he has seen any examples of “irresponsible and unjustifiable” pay in Yorkshire.

Mr Boyle said: “From my standpoint as a recruiter of board level executives, Nick Clegg’s comments have more to do with political positioning than reality.

“In this region, executive pay is generally in line with the market conditions, in other words, you get what you pay for at the differing salary levels.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“There is no strong evidence in this region of the ‘irresponsible and unjustifiable’ pay to which Nick Clegg refers.

“In my experience, people who are the higher earners in the private sector generally possess greater inherent ability, have committed more to furthering their education and qualifications, have taken more risks and are prepared to cope with the immense pressure of a 24-7 results-orientated environment.

“The majority of people would not want their jobs, even if they possessed the skills.

“Businesses use remuneration as a means of attracting the best talent and in turn, ambitious individuals are incentivised to work harder and progress by the prospect of a better-paid job. Some people are able to run faster than others in this respect.”

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

It’s hard to disagree with any of that, although I’m sure there are some union chiefs out there who might want to.

Underlying the issue of executive remuneration is the deeper and more fundamental problem of the have and the have-nots.

Mr Clegg’s comments chimed perfectly with public disquiet about the growing wealth divide, underlined yesterday by a report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

New research shows that the divide between rich and poor has risen more quickly in Britain than in any other country in the OECD. Jose Angel Gurria, director general, warned that inequality would continue to rise without a comprehensive strategy for inclusive growth.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“The social contract is starting to unravel in many countries,” he said.

We saw signs of that unravelling in the riots that shook Britain earlier this year.

This is an incredibly difficult problem to solve. Numerous revolutionaries have lived and died in pursuit of solutions over the centuries.

Instead of offering any of my own, I can only ask more questions.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

What would our society be like if our top executives were paid less?

Would it be more just? Would wealth be spread more evenly? Would everyone live happily ever after? I’m not sure life is that simple. It never is.

But if there is an alternative way of structuring society in a just way that hasn’t already been shown by history to be totally flawed, I’d love to hear about it. I’ll print the best suggestions.

The country might be going to the dogs, but people still love going out to eat and drink, reassuring new research claims.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

They are going out 2.3 times per month more than six months ago, according to a study of 3,000 consumers.

Coffee shops are the biggest beneficiaries, hardly surprising given the mood-elevating properties of caffeine. (That’s not scientifically proven – it’s just based on personal experience.)

The official line from researchers was that the findings “demonstrate the continuing resilience of the going-out market”. @bernardginns