14/04/2016 Scotland 2016

BP shareholders have voted against a 20% pay rise

The vote is non-binding and Mr Dudley has already been paid

the ?14 million but BP says it'll take the protest

But unions are left wondering if executive pay has

With jobs and profits falling in the proposed 20% pay rise for BP's Chief

Executive stunned many. It prompted the in situ. Directors to say that

this risk sending the wrong message to other companies. Last year BP

reported its biggest ever operating loss. There's a massive pay rise

therefore per verse? This is the crazy world of chief executives. The

formula for his pay reflect how well BP did relative to other companies.

On this measure Bob Dudley was a success because she is in BP fell

less than shell and Exxon. Also Bob Dudley had the Deepwater Horizon

disaster of 2010 to settle. That cost 11 people their lives and cost

the company 50 billion dollars. According to a think tank FTSE 100

bosses now earns 182 times more than the average full-time worker. In

2014 the average pay was a whopping ?4.96 million. What is more, this

disparity has widened considerably since 2010. Perhaps we are not all

in this together. I'm joined now by Dave

Moxham, Deputy General And in London is Kate Andrews from

the Institute of Economic Affairs. Good evening. Date Andrews, 14

million, is that an acceptable figure for a salary particularly

when 59% of the shareholders said no? This comes down to what the

shareholders say, or it should. This is an excellent example of how Chief

Executive salaries should be put in check, not from the public, not from

the Government, but from the shareholders and those who are

tracking the profit and loss of the company. It is not just about the

company making profits. If a company is doing well it can create more

jobs for other people. If it is doing badly there can be reductions

for people. The shareholders said it was not just profits but job cuts

was concerned about. This is an example of how Chief Executive pay

is sometimes very high. In this case it does not seem he has been doing

the job to the extent the shareholders would like him to be

doing and he is being held to account. But he has still pocketed

the ?14 million. That is a contract that he made with the shareholders

that they approved that while back. That would be like looking back on

and employees record for one year and docking salary. That is not a

salary works. Dave Moxham, Bob Dudley has met his targets and he

has been paid accordingly according to his contract. What is the

problem? The profit is made by the entire workforce. I am glad the

shareholders did what they did. They themselves are fund managers and

well-paid people. Even in this example and with many of the

examples where shareholder checks feel we are talking about mainly a

gentleman 's club where the ordinary worker and the ordinary consumer has

no say even though their lives are fundamentally affected by decisions

that I made. But chief executives can add billions to the worth of a

company through their work. As it's not fair, a figure out of this world

perhaps four hours, but is it not feared they are rewarded at this

level was Jim they tend not to. Because the entire workforce that

does that. Very often they are looking at shareholder value. That

is not a blueprint for long-term patient investment in the future of

our company. While executive pay is a by short-term spike in shareholder

prices and shareholder profits we are not looking at the patient

long-term investment that we need for our companies to succeed. What

we are seeing here, a massive and growing disparity between what the

workers are taking hormones what the people at the top are taking home.

Look at the crisis in the north sea. Workers have faced a 10% pay

reduction and another 10% pay reduction but they are not seen at

the top of the oil industry. Anybody who thinks that Chief Executive

Pagels into a big part and they were not getting paid at amount it we go

out to increase salaries, that is not the case. That is not pay

salaries work. Salaries are based on the value that one brings to a

company. At this is an important point. This should not be a

conversation about high pay. He pay is not necessarily correlated to low

pay. We need to look at the lowest paid in society, how people at the

bottom are not able to access what they should be able to access. How

the cost of living, childcare, is placing people out of what they

should be able to afford. That is the real frustration. It is not that

some people are paid more or less than others. Most people are all

came back. It is that so many people at the bottom are struggling to

access things. Talk about Chief Executive pay is a smoke and mirrors

issue. Would a disposable income and the gap there, chief executives

bring home millions of pounds, but they are paying so much of that

through taxes. The Office of National Statistics found last week

that if you take into account taxes when looking at income and equality

that percentage shrinks massively. These are people who are paying for

a lot of public services. But fundamentally we need to talk about

the low paid, talking about the high-paid is not making those less

well off better off. It is reassuring to hear support for

interventions like minimum wages at the bottom end. Certainly not the

living wage. That'll put people out of jobs. It is not reflected in the

main arguments put forward by the organisation. What you said about

the national living wage does not give me much hope. It is good to

hear that there is some commitment from right-wing think tanks in

respect of the lowest paid. There is a called relation between company

behaviours and high wealth is distributed. Ridiculous settlements

like we have seen to date and increasing over the last period

contributed to bad company behaviours. Bad company behaviours

are not good for even distribution of wealth. But the tax point, these

people contribute a huge amount in tax. They do not compared

historically. In the 1970s in me had a more equal society Chief Executive

's were being paid less and contributing more in tax. If you

wanted to distribute that income across a more even playing field is

the company, you would find that the tax that was payback is

significantly more. That is not how we just work. They do not go into a

big pot and are not distributed by this affect number. Wealth and wages

are relative. It is misleading to tell the public who might be

struggling and who might not be getting a fair share and deserve

higher wages, that the food reduced salaries at the top we would see

that reflected in their own salary. That is not true. That is not that I

have been arguing on other art examples of where Chief Executive

Peter distributed would have that effect. Short-term behaviour

encouraged by this sort of settlement is bad food distribution

of wealth. I am confused by what you mean by settlement. The shareholders

are pushing back. This is people at the top being held to account. As we

see more Chief Executives earning this type of Sally Willis come to a

point of the workers might say, enough is enough? I cannot speak to

each individual company. There is always the possibility that you

could say strikes. Companies like Facebook give the employees the

urgency to invest in a company. All companies are handling this in

different ways. Here is the real question. But everybody in the UK

was on a basic minimum income of ?50,000 per year and that the

spending power that of 2-D would any of us clear if the person at the top

and 1 billion ?100 billion? The answer is no. This conversation is

highlighting not that we care about people at the top, that's people at

the bottom are not doing well enough. Attacking rich people is

covering up the real problem for people at the bottom. We have heard

that point before as well but what do you think workers make

essentially do about these big pay packets? Workers are increasingly

concerned about them. We are at risk of seeing increased levels of

industrial action. Governments will come under more pressure not just

from workers but from consumers to intervene more. There will be more

arguments for transparency. Bringing that is together in the context of

the crash of 2010, there is a long way to go.

We have to leave it there. Now, living in the countryside has

many benefits, but rapid public In the past, bus routes

were privatised and the less This is one of the key

priorities for rural areas with the first in a series

of special reports. Living in the countryside can be

idyllic. But it can be a real problem when it comes to getting out

and about. Especially when you do not have your own transport. What

are your options at the regular bus service is not frequent and does not

travel to where you want or need to go?

To consummate the regular service that is a network of community

transport groups across Scotland. -- to complement the killer service.

This local group has been running for 16 years. They have ten

accessible buses offering a door-to-door service.

Local authorities normally step in to fund less profitable routes but

with council reductions this is becoming increasingly difficult.

Scotland has a growing elderly population. Many older people find

it difficult to use public transport. That is why projects like

this one are plugging the gap. How big an issue is rural transport

and the issue of older and more honourable people being left

isolated? It is a huge issue and that is growing. We have an ageing

population in Britain. We have a high ageing population in this area.

We also have a high disadvantaged population. We have got one of the

least well off areas. We have a lot of people with mental health

difficulties, people with physical difficulties. They cannot get out

that there's huge train on the local economy but it is also so damaging

for them. You have somebody in the hospital who cannot get out because

they cannot get back into their home because they cannot get transport.

The community bus has arrived. After picking up passengers from

surrounding villages. They are meeting for tea and cake before

heading for a shopping trip. It is not just social outing to stop the

service also provides transport for medical and other appointments. It

has opened a lot of doors for the community. The people in the

community would otherwise have been housebound. It has been great. You

are picked up at your door and taken back to Eudora. You meet a lot of

flames on the bus. But choose everybody up. If I want to go to

Peterhead I have got to go down to Fraserburgh and then challenge --

and then travel to Peterhead. I cannot read numbers. This bus is a

godsend. Transport is seen by some as a key

to its success. It is something the new Scottish Government will have to

tackle after the 5th of May. Community transport freeze people

from isolation, it enables people to live independent lives and enables

them to live at home because they have access to services. I would

suggest that with, for example, the newly formed health and social care

partnerships, for example, that looking at transport should be an

important consideration for the new partnerships. To keep the service

going, there's a small charge to use the community bus. 1.3 million

people in Scotland have a free bus pass, but a lot of cardholders in

rural areas are not benefiting. Why should we be charging? It is about

fairness and equality. While -- why should our miserable clients pay

when equally, in the city, -- vulnerable. Rural clients and the

will.i.am passengers Community transport goes some way to

offering a solution. But it is fragile, depending on different

sources of funding from users and already squeezed budgets.

Whoa, we're half way there - take my hand

Jon Bon Jovi helping us out as we reach the halfway mark

Andrew Black has been rounding up this week's events so far.

Is this the week when the Scottish election campaign fully took off?

Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie literally took to the skies

to sell his message. Meanwhile, Nicola Sturgeon of the SNP tried to

get down with the kids. And Labour's Kezia Dugdale went out on her bike

and got wet in the rain. While a few other political parties, including

the Conservatives, attempted to raise their game by launching

election manifestos. We are heading far our best ever Holyrood results.

More votes and SNP 's than ever before --. The Greens also unveiled

their pitch. The incredible membership surge we've seen and the

new branches sprinting up in communities all over Scotland. It

has been a joy to take part in and I can't tell you how long we've been

waiting to fight Scottish polymer collection on this scale. That said,

the party knows they have to work hard to raise their profile. Patrick

becometh he is the leader of the Green Party for Scotland. How would

you do? I'm very well. Ukip also published their manifesto this week.

Scottish leader David Cockburn gave us an insight into how it was

written. You put things into the public domain. Do your research them

or do you make them up? A bit of both. I try to be interesting and

fun, so that people listen. But it wasn't all fun this week. Protesters

barracked a conservative meeting in London following the Panama Papers

tax avoidance scandal. This man has done a more... He has looked at his

own pocket and I still refer to him as Dodgy Dave. At Westminster,

Dennis Skinner was chucked out of the Commons for that jibe at the

Prime Minister's affairs. David Cameron, who denies any wrongdoing,

denied -- joined the flurry of senior politicians publishing their

tax returns. He had a go by Jeremy Corbyn for being tardy with his. The

biggest distraction today has been waiting for the right Honourable

gentleman's tax return. It has been a return to Earth for some

politicians this week, but it is not over yet. We are only halfway to the

election campaign, with manifestos from the Liberal Democrats, SNP and

Labour still to land. I'm now joined by a couple of guests

to discuss the election We have Stephen Naysmith,

the social affairs correspondent of The Herald and Anna Burnside,

features writer Good evening. The election carries

on. Halfway there. Three weeks to go. Three weeks tonight the results

will be coming in. Steven, what's were your key points this week? The

panama papers were a big event and a tax return is being published. Yes,

this has been a rush to fall into line. Once one of the leaders had

been forced to reveal their tax affairs, it was a domino effect.

Everybody wants to be seen to be being opened. In Scotland we saw

that with the leaders rushing to get their tax returns out. They went

particularly juicy or interesting. No, it has become one of those

things you have to do. I think it is a bit of a big fuss over nothing.

There isn't a box on your tax return which you take to say you've got a

huge investment offshore. It doesn't tell you the things we want to know.

They don't address the issues raised by the Panama Papers, so people can

look as if they are being open and joining in, but in fact, they are

telling us very little. Stephen, on tax, I know another variety of tax,

we saw how much money and how each extra revenue compared to the UK

Government would generate with that IPPR report. What the Jamaica that?

-- what did you make of that? Some of the parties are being timid about

what they plan to do given that Scotland has acquired these new

powers and the SNP which obviously has lobbied hard for the vowel to be

delivered and for Scotland to get as many powers as it can, is not being

terribly aggressive with what it plans to do or how it plans to make

use of those powers. The figures showed Labour would raise most, I

think the Greens... The Greens are 950 million, with quite an

aggressive policy towards the very rich. And other parties, I think the

Tories are raising nothing at all, they plan to raise through other

methods like tuition fees... And perception charges. And paying for

education as well. When you saw these figures, Anna, what did you

make of them? New powers, some people are thinking you could be

raising more, and with the SNP is saying they are raising 300 million,

raising more, and with the SNP is they are saying that's actually be

fairer way to combat austerity? people are feeling this actually

isn't the radical new different Scotland that they thought that the

yes campaign was bringing us. The problem for the parties is that the

IPPR identified their be a ?2 billion shortfall by 2020?

IPPR identified their be a ?2 is offering something people quite

like in terms of the personal appeal. People find her brand of

working-class Tory is perhaps more appealing than her personal style.

Overall, I think the polls are not showing that she has managed to

overcome the kind of toxic Tory brand in Scotland fully and decided

that she will form the opposition is a good line to be pushing, but I am

much of it is that realistic. It is a great poll, though. Scotland wants

a kick boxing lesbian, but it doesn't want Tory! That is a great

takeaway format, isn't it was remarked we are nearly at the end of

this programme and will finish on a lighter note. You see these new

figures showing a rise in vinyl sales, reaching a 21 year high after

the decline when CDs came in. Anna, what are your thoughts? Were you

surprised at vinyl coming back into fashion? Just a massive regret that

I had sold all my Fall singles. I could be selling them to people with

beards for ten times what I got from them at the time! Stephen, it is the

hipster trend may be for this, or not? Do people appreciate the music

you get from a vinyl? The bit of this survey suggested that it might

be hipster trend is the fact that nearly half the people buying a

vinyl say they don't actually play it and 7% of them don't have a

record player. That is fairly extraordinary sort of fashion item.

Like expensive posters feel wall, perhaps. I don't know why they would

buy records they don't play. Kind of the design item, I suppose. They are

lovely things and I think that is what people are appreciating. They

are appreciating them as objects as well as music, the cover, the

design, the yellow vinyl, the whole package. All the things that you

don't get that download can never provide. You can never get excited

about a download. For the cynicism, there is something nice about the

sound of vinyl, the sound of analogue and I do not know if that

is because of the sound quality because people tend to listen to it

on better equipment than an iPod. And you listen to the whole album!

This is one of the things that I hope the 40% to listen to their

records by, that they will listen to a whole album as it was meant to be,

not on shuffle, not just cherry picking the greatest hits. Yes, like

as old people. Talking of a good experience, when you look at the

that cinema chain in America, who was suggesting that they may allow

younger customers to text during films. Talking of an experienced,

Stephen, would that change the sin experience? I think it is

unwarranted. You go to the cinema to watch a film. I go to the cinema

lots, people's faces light up when they put on their iPod. The whole

road lights up! You see people who can leave it alone for a minute,

they are busy updating Facebook or tweeting and it is extraordinary. If

you want to do that, you can do that at home. Anna it can be extremely

annoying, consequential Mark yes, it is shocking. I would like the return

of the stern charrette with the torch to be the beam of light of

shame onto people who texting and give them a loud talking to and

evict them. I'm hard-core. Thank you both very much for joining me today.

That's it for tonight and for this week.

On Tuesday, we have special 2016 debate on energy policy.

If you'd like to be in the audience at our Pacific Quay studios go

to the BBC Scotland election 2016 page

So join him then, usual time, bye-bye.