'Why won't Tories take on bad bosses harming workers and wasting taxpayer cash'
Dame Alison Rose, the former CEO of NatWest, shouldn’t have spoken to a journalist about the status of a customer account. You wouldn’t want that to happen to you, and it shouldn’t have happened to Nigel Farage. It was therefore right for the NatWest board to decide what action to take, which led to Dame Alison resigning from her role.
There are two bigger issues at play, however.
First, should a bank be able to decline someone a bank account based on their personal views? The rules on this have now changed, but the answer is clearly no (unless you happen to be a terrorist, or such like).
Second, why did No10 intervene on a consumer complaint between an individual and a bank? And why did the Treasury intervene on what appeared to be an individual breach of data protection and banking regulation?
It’s because the individual in question has power over the Conservative Party, but ordinary customers and workers like you and me don’t.
Teachers, civil servants and train drivers walk out in biggest strike in decade
Dame Alison Rose has resigned as the boss of NatWest after admitting being the source of an inaccurate story about Nigel Farage (AP)In response to the news,
of other CEOs behaving badly where government has not intervened.
I referenced the CEO of P&O ferries who illegally sacked nearly 800 workers. “But Boris Johnson called for him to resign!” said some. Yes, but was any definitive action taken? No. And is Downing Street today pushing for him to resign? No. The CEO is still in post, having admitted to breaking the law.
“The government had to intervene because we own 39% of NatWest”, said others. But we own 100% of the Post Office. Has Downing Street intervened on the CEO there, who has taken bonus payments based on false information in relation to the Horizon scandal? Of course not.
And what about the CEOs who have walked away with customers' money, or pushed financial risk on the taxpayer?
Like the CEO of Avro Energy, who was never qualified to run an energy company. A company which went bust, the £700million cost of corporate failure picked up by bill payers. A CEO who walked away with millions of pounds of customers' money, with no consequence.
Or the former CEOs of Thames Water, or the regulator Ofwat? Who allowed £14billion of debt to be put on this ‘too important to fail’ utility that only the taxpayer can save if it goes bust.
What about the CEOs who use technology to oppress their workers? As I highlighted in cross examination of senior executives at Amazon and the Royal Mail? Any action from Downing Street? None.
Or the CEOs that aggressively used fire and rehire tactics, for example at British Gas and now at Asda? Through our work on the business committee, ministers agreed to update the guidance on the use of fire and rehire. But have they introduced the employment rights bill promised in the 2019 conservative manifesto? No. Have they improved the enforcement of labour laws in the UK? No, even though they said they would.
Richard 'shuts up' GMB guest who says Hancock 'deserved' being called 'd***head'
I’ve questioned many Prime Ministers, ministers, and CEOs as Chair of the Business Committee. I could provide many more examples that warrant the government to act on your behalf.
So, can you spot the difference in the Coutts-Farage case? Who has power in our country? And who does the Conservative Party serve? It’s not you and me, that’s for sure.
* Follow Mirror Politics on Snapchat, Tiktok, Twitter and Facebook.
Read more similar news:
Comments:
comments powered by Disqus
