The remuneration of the CEO of large publicly listed companies, in this case – banks, is a case for the remuneration committee of each public company that is answerable to the shareholders. What is missing in this debate is the free market value of a CEO who can drive the profits of a $100Bn+ company. Not everybody can do that and those who can are paid handsomely for it. For the record, the $9.227Bn 2016 profit is only a 2% increase over the previous year.
Liberal MP’s say that CommBank CEO’s 50% increase in pay to some $12.3Mn is out of step with community expectations. If they sought to help set community expectations on how and why large publicly listed companies are remunerated so well, then perhaps community expectations may be more in line with an educated persons’.
Labor’s demand for a Royal Commission is simply populist and bears no true justification. They cannot even articulate the terms of reference they would seek which just goes to show how unjustified such a move is.
As for Senator Sam Dastyari saying it appears like 1984’s Wall Street movie, what an ignorant and populist thing to say. But then, that is Dastyari for you; all showmanship with nothing to show.
If shareholders were truly outraged by CEO remuneration, they would express this at the AGM and demand the remuneration committee have more conservative criteria. The fact that shareholders understand the talent required to drive their investment says more than any MP who wants to bang on about unjust pay for large organization CEOs.
As for the PM, if we were prepared to pay him $10Mn, perhaps you would get some real talent in parliament instead of some union hacks. Unfortunately you would still get Turnbull but you would attract a significant number of better qualified people than we currently do. You could always half the number of politicians and double their pay!