Originally, it had been planned that government guidance on the new laws would be published “early in the new year”, so that businesses could get to grips with the legislation before it came into force.
Now the guidance has been put back – with no date for its publication other than that it will be “in due course” – and the Act will not be implemented until three months after the guidance is released.
Businesses will no doubt welcome the delay as giving them extra time to prepare for the Act, which makes it essential to review risks and put in place any necessary procedures to prevent bribery and mitigate the risk of committing offences, which include offering or giving a bribe or accepting one.
It will also be an offence for a commercial organisation to fail to prevent bribery by someone performing services on their behalf, regardless of the capacity in which that person is acting, with the only defence being able to show “adequate procedures” – not defined in the Act – to prevent bribery.
Businesses are likely to be looking to the guidance to clarify where they stand on corporate hospitality and when it might fall foul of the Act. The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has said that "sensible and proportionate expenditure on hospitality will remain perfectly lawful”, although a bit more detail on what constitutes “sensible and proportionate” will be welcome as there’s some scope for interpretation there.
In the meantime, last week, in response to a question in the House of Lords, Justice Minister Lord McNally said that estimates suggested the cost of enforcing the offence of failure to prevent bribery would be £2 million a year. He also said “the SFO expects to carry out all its normal functions, including Bribery Act investigations and prosecutions, within its announced funding settlement”.
According to the Daily Telegraph’s report on those comments, the SFO’s budget will be cut by £34 million this year to around £29 million by 2014, which may leave some wondering about just how much financial scope there will be for investigations and prosecutions when the Act finally does kick in.
For more information, please visit www.glazers.co.uk
[ add comment ] ( 5 views ) | permalink |
( 2.9 / 154 )It used to be that retirement was something we looked forward to as a time to take things easy and do more of the things we enjoy, thanks to saving for an older age free of money worries.
But things have changed over recent years. A few days ago, the Prudential released research showing that a fifth of people planning to retire this year were still paying off debts, owing an average of £33,100 each. Meanwhile, a YouGov poll for the National Association of Pension Funds (NAPF) today reveals that 43 per cent of people not currently retired say they cannot afford to save for retirement.
So today’s news that John McFall, former chair of the Treasury Select Committee, is to lead an inquiry into retirement saving by the Workplace Retirement Income Commission (WRIC), a move initiated by NAPF, is welcome indeed.
Measures are already under way to combat the ticking pensions time bomb of around 12 million British workers not saving enough for retirement.
The phased introduction of auto-enrolment will begin next year, with all workers aged over 22 and earning above the income tax personal allowance eventually being automatically signed up to save into a pension fund provided by their employer or, if none is available, the National Employment Savings Trust.
Describing auto-enrolment as “visionary”, Lord McFall says there is still a risk that millions of people will be left behind and that the new pensions regime should be “the beginning of the reform process, rather than the end”.
He wants to simplify pension provision – pointing out that there have been 800 changes in the pensions landscape since 1995 – and explore fees charged by fund managers and intermediaries, to establish whether people are getting the best return for their investment.
And he stresses that as well as reaching out to those in business and the pensions industry, the inquiry will be particularly focusing on the people at the heart of the matter – those who are trying to save for their retirement.
The inquiry will publish its findings in October this year to help the government make good a coalition agreement pledge to “reinvigorate” occupational pensions.
While we wait, at least there’s one person who won’t have to worry about their pension. The Daily Telegraph reports that the Bank of England has topped up governor Mervyn King's pension pot by £1.4 million, taking it to around £5.3 million, which means that when he leaves the bank, on expiry of his current term in 2013, he will be eligible to draw an annual pension equivalent to £198,200 today. As they say, nice work if you can get it.
For more information, please visit www.glazers.co.uk
[ add comment ] ( 5 views ) | permalink |
( 2.9 / 206 )John Cridland takes up his post as director-general of the CBI today and has wasted little time in making it clear where he stands on the UK economy.
In an interview with the Financial Times he describes himself as a “relative optimist”, a position that reflects what businesses have been telling him.
"The companies I talk to can see that growth is slowly and steadily building," he says. What’s more, Mr Cridland is backing the government’s strategy for recovery and growth, saying: "The coalition has done well for business so far."
Those are comments likely to be music to the ears of David Cameron and George Osborne but the CBI chief doesn’t stop there.
He throws down something of a challenge, saying the time has come to step up the pace even more and adding: "I believe we have 24 months to deliver a strategy which achieves above-trend growth to maintain the living standards of the British citizen."
A key date in the diary of Mr Cridland – and a fair number of British citizens and businesses – will be 23 March, when Mr Osborne presents the 2011 Budget, which the CBI chief says needs to set out a strong growth strategy as a twin priority to reducing the national deficit.
Mr Cridland’s comments suggest that he is likely to be a critical friend to the coalition: supportive where he feels it appropriate, ready to speak out when he thinks they’re going wrong. His reaction to the government’s Budget and growth strategy should make for interesting listening and reading.
For more information, please visit www.glazers.co.uk
[ add comment ] ( 5 views ) | permalink |
( 2.9 / 265 )The head of UK Financial Investments (UKFI) – the body tasked with looking after the government’s holdings in various troubled banks – presented the government with an interesting dilemma when he told MPs that breaking up the largest institutions would be likely to reduce the value of the stakes held by the taxpayer.
Robin Budenberg told the Treasury Select Committee that any attempt to divide retail and investment banking would have a negative impact on the share prices of Lloyds Banking Group and Royal Bank of Scotland – in which the government currently holds stakes worth £67billion.
The coalition’s Independent Commission on Banking (ICB), which is currently investigating the structure of the banks, suggested this week that it may call for the government to break up some of the largest institutions – meaning no moves to sell the taxpayer’s stakes are likely until the position is confirmed, which is likely to be in September.
Mr Budenberg admitted there would have to be a ‘trade-off’ between the government’s aims of maximising competition in the banking sector and achieving the biggest return possible for taxpayers on the sale of their stakes. If the ICB does indeed call for a break-up of the likes of Lloyds and RBS, this will be a difficult balance to strike.
Of course, Mr Budenberg’s comments only represent his own views and there may be others who consider the banks could be worth just as their constituent parts. This will not be an easy decision to make when the time comes, but whatever happens, it is in everyone’s interests that the banks concerned continue to recover in the meantime, maximising their value for a break-up or eventual sale.
For more information, please visit www.glazers.co.uk
[ add comment ] ( 5 views ) | permalink |
( 3 / 242 )The number of jobs to be axed at local councils over the coming months is steadily mounting as public sector cuts start to take their toll in the bid to drive down the national deficit.
Since the start of the year, Hampshire County Council has announced that 1,200 jobs are to go. Norfolk County Council is to shed 1,000 jobs and Manchester City Council 2,000. Portsmouth City Council has said it will cut its workforce by 400.
Today, we have reports that Liverpool City Council is to slash around 1,500 jobs from its payroll over the next two years as it seeks to make £141 million of savings between now and 2013, with £91 million in cost-cutting required in 2011-12.
Interestingly, the news comes in the same week that Liverpool opened what is being dubbed an “embassy” in London to help woo investors.
With Liverpool identified by independent research group Centre for Cities as one of the UK cities likely to be hardest hit by public sector cuts – in 2008, around a third of jobs there were in the public sector – it’s a bold step designed to put Liverpool firmly in the shop window.
As Liverpool City Council leader Cllr Joe Anderson says: "Private sector investment is going to be vital to repair the damage caused by the cuts imposed on us.”
Sited, rather appropriately, close to Liverpool Street, the embassy is a joint scheme by the council, public sector groups and 30 Liverpool businesses and is funded by the businesses.
Initially it will be open for three months, but if the success of the Liverpool pavilion at the 2010 World Expo in Shanghai is anything to go by – it attracted 770,000 visitors – it may well be extended.
Those Liverpool council job cuts are a real blow to the local economy. But Liverpool is clearly fighting back and that can only be admired. Perhaps there’s a lesson to be learned elsewhere in the UK.
For more information, please visit www.glazers.co.uk
[ add comment ] ( 5 views ) | permalink |
( 3 / 230 )
Random Entry
