In Reply to: Re: How Members were stuffed posted by J. M. Howell on 22 April 2004 at 07:54:35:
Without comment on malversation, I can provide some data. This is because the company accounts of IBM UK Pensions Trust Ltd are public, like those for any other UK company.
The accounts are not always easy to understand but I read the payments to trustee-directors as follows.
Year Total ŁK Highest ŁK
1990 17 8.5
1991 17 8.5
1992 99 80
(1992 bumped by 3 "Performance Related Pay" 7 "pensions contributions" and 71 "other emoluments". Don't ask me how one gets performance related pay for being a trustee.)
1993 105 86 (3, 8, 75 in categories above)
1994 30 5 (But also 43 "other" and 101 "compensation for loss of office".)
1995 35 15
1996 35 15
1997 19 10
1998 15 10
(1998 figures were later restated as 32 15 because, as I read it, some money that was being paid to a third party for expert advice was finding its way back to a trustee)
1999 47 17
Nobody disputes that there is a conflict of interest in receiving money from something that one is supposed to be monitoring but conflicts of interest may be managed successfully so as to have no effect. You might think this is easier for the elected trustees (whose re-appointment does not depend on pleasing the payer) than for non-elected trustees (who can be unappointed by IBM at any time).
(Not with trustee hat on)