logo
#

Latest news with #inequality

Developing countries ‘need more debt relief' to fund education and health
Developing countries ‘need more debt relief' to fund education and health

The Guardian

time2 hours ago

  • Business
  • The Guardian

Developing countries ‘need more debt relief' to fund education and health

Developing countries need a fresh round of debt relief, to prevent money urgently needed for health and education being diverted to creditors, according to a major new report commissioned by the late Pope Francis. The Jubilee report, produced by a panel of experts chaired by Nobel prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, argues for debt restructuring, along the lines of the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries initiative (HIPC). Stiglitz told the Guardian that many developing countries are facing a 'perfect storm' as they had little choice but to ramp up borrowing through the Covid crisis and subsequently faced sharply higher interest rates as central banks battled to tackle inflation. 'Now, because of Trump tariffs, there's a global slowdown expected and that will give them even less revenue, and potentially it could lead to higher inflation and that again would lead to even higher interest rates. It's one thing after another,' Stiglitz said. The report warns that many governments, fearful of the consequences of default, 'prioritise timely debt payments over essential development spending. This is not a path to sustainable development. Rather, it is a roadblock to development and leads to increasing inequality and discontent.' The HIPC debt relief programme emerged out of a concerted campaign by civil society groups, including churches, calling for a 'jubilee' for cash-starved developing countries. The initiative saw more than $100bn of debt cancelled – including as a result of commitments made at the Gleneagles G8 summit, chaired by the UK. With 2025 designated a jubilee year by the Catholic church, Pope Francis commissioned the new report, to explore how the current debt crisis could be tackled. He called last year for 'an international mechanism for debt restructuring based on the solidarity and harmony of peoples.' The report will be presented to his successor, Leo XIV, at the Vatican on Friday. The research underscores the gravity of the situation for many countries, warning: 'The consequences are particularly acute in Africa, where debt distress is most severe. Approximately 57% of the continent's population – 751 million people, including nearly 288 million living in extreme poverty – reside in countries that spend more on servicing external debt than on education or healthcare.' The authors warn that the impact is likely to be rising poverty and malnutrition, the 'erosion of hope' and 'deepening social fractures'. They also point out that the situation is more complex than in the early 2000s, when much of the debt was owed to governments, or other public sector bodies. 'The international community has a moral obligation to advance a 'HIPC II.' However, the challenges of implementing such a comprehensive solution today are greater than those faced during the original HIPC initiative,' the report says. As well as debt write-offs, the report argues for a series of technical and legal changes to the global financial system, to tackle the debt crisis and prevent it recurring again. Sign up to Global Dispatch Get a different world view with a roundup of the best news, features and pictures, curated by our global development team after newsletter promotion These include backing calls for legislation in the UK, where much sovereign debt is issued, that would force private sector creditors to bear their fair share of write-offs in any debt restructuring agreement. 'The private guys shouldn't get more than the public guys,' said Stiglitz. The authors also argue for a 'no bailout clause' that would stop rescue loans offered by the International Monetary Fund to hard-pressed governments being used to pay off private sector lenders. Governments are due to discuss debt relief at the UN Funding for Development conference in Seville at the end of this month. A draft outcome document was agreed this week, including a commitment to seek 'an intergovernmental process at the United Nations, with a view to make recommendations for closing gaps in the debt architecture and exploring options to address debt sustainability'. That was significantly weaker than language advocated by African governments, that would have promised 'far reaching reform' of the global system and 'a more comprehensive, fair and effective multilateral mechanism for preventing and resolving sovereign debt crises'. Keir Starmer has been urged by the directors of scores of UK charities and campaign groups to attend the summit in person and back plans for debt relief.

Psychopaths are most likely to live in these US states
Psychopaths are most likely to live in these US states

The Independent

time13 hours ago

  • Health
  • The Independent

Psychopaths are most likely to live in these US states

A new study indicates a correlation between adverse social conditions and higher levels of psychopathy, narcissism, and sadism. The research analyzed data from 1.8 million people across 183 countries, including 144,000 in the U.S., linking personality traits to societal factors like poverty, inequality, and violence. Researchers found that in societies where rules are broken and conditions are poor, individuals tend to prioritize self-interest, leading to higher 'Dark Factor' levels. U.S. states such as Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas, Nevada and New York were identified with higher 'Dark Factor' levels, while Utah, Vermont, and Alaska showed lower levels. The study suggests that personality is shaped by societal conditions, implying that reforms to reduce corruption and inequality could help prevent the development of negative personality traits.

I would make the Green party a force at the heart of British politics. That's why I'm running to be co-leader
I would make the Green party a force at the heart of British politics. That's why I'm running to be co-leader

The Guardian

time3 days ago

  • Politics
  • The Guardian

I would make the Green party a force at the heart of British politics. That's why I'm running to be co-leader

I've been an activist since I was a teenager. I've marched against apartheid, was arrested for protesting peacefully against environmental breakdown, have campaigned for warm homes with Friends of the Earth, worked with peace-builders in war-torn northern Uganda and more. I've spent my life fighting for a fairer, greener world. And today, as a member of parliament and Green party co-leadership candidate alongside Adrian Ramsay, I'm more convinced than ever that the power and hope of activism must go hand in hand with electoral nous to win the change we need at the heart of our politics. Because the stakes couldn't be higher. We face an accelerating climate and nature crisis, soaring inequality in everything from health to housing, and a government complicit in genocide. Disillusionment with politics is at record levels. After years of Conservative chaos, people hoped Labour would bring real change. Instead, it's doubling down on the damage: cutting support to the most vulnerable, refusing to tax extreme wealth, rowing back on climate action and trashing protections for the natural world. They may not call it austerity, but it feels the same. It's no wonder Nigel Farage and Reform UK are exploiting this opportunity, sowing division and channelling justified anger at inequality into misdirected hate. And it's more urgent than ever that we step up with credible solutions. This is the defining political battle of our time: hope v fear. The Green party can and must lead a hopeful fightback, offering a genuine alternative and a home for voters who feel abandoned by Labour and the Tories. People trust the Greens – polling shows we now have higher favourability ratings than any other party. Under the leadership of Carla Denyer and Adrian, we've had our most successful electoral period, quadrupling our number of MPs and almost doubling our number of councillors. We've built the foundation. Now it's time to build the transformation. Adrian and I are standing to be co-leaders of the Green party with one simple aim: to win enough Green MPs to be able to shape government policy after the next general election. In our skewed electoral system, that means building a broad coalition of voters – reaching out well beyond our traditional base, not just preaching to the choir. And that's exactly what Adrian and I know how to do. We've been campaigners all our lives. Adrian joined the Greens at 16 and became one of the youngest councillors in the UK. He played a key part in creating the party's 'target to win' strategy that has transformed our electoral fortunes. I joined in 2015, compelled by the rise of Farage's politics of division. I couldn't bear to see his brand of political poison seeping into the lifeblood of my country. And in July last year, I overturned a Conservative majority of almost 25,000 to become MP for North Herefordshire – one of the biggest electoral swings in UK history. Let's be clear: it's entirely possible that Greens at Westminster could play a pivotal role in a hung parliament and help shape the next government. Green parties around the world – in Germany, Ireland, New Zealand, Scotland and Finland – have successfully grown their vote and won real power in government. We need to be laser-focused on our goal: to convert the support we have in the community into leverage at the centre of political power. For that, we need leadership with the experience and credibility to win new voters over, and then convert that mandate into policy wins. As MPs, Adrian and I are already speaking out in parliament every day, challenging injustice and bringing the voice of grassroots campaigns into the parliamentary system. We're insurgents with integrity, campaigners with a platform in the Commons. Our leadership campaign is about turning protest into political change: empowering local teams, raising national ambition, and growing a party that's ready for power in parliament and in councils, communities and coalitions across the country. We believe the Green party can and must take on Reform and win. Not by aping the divisive 'populist' rhetoric of Farage, but by connecting with the broadest possible range of people and showing that Green policies embody their aspirations for a fairer country and a livable future. And that's where our record matters. Adrian and I have won multiple first-past-the-post elections by inspiring huge teams of activists. We know what it takes to win in, and then to transform, our broken political system. Again and again, we've found that our values correspond with deep wellsprings of compassion and solidarity among people in every community and demographic. That's why we know that we can grow the Green party even faster. So to every Green party member considering this election, I say: let's not walk away from the success that we've built and the trust that we've won. As other parties react to the crises we face by sliding ever deeper into magical thinking and empty rhetoric, we need a Green leadership that's firmly rooted in our values, unafraid to speak truth and ready to act on it. Divisive populist politics is a recipe for chaos and failure. By turning widely shared green values into many more Green votes, the Green party can and must be the antidote. Ellie Chowns is the MP for North Herefordshire

CEO pay at UK's top companies is 52 times that of typical worker, report finds
CEO pay at UK's top companies is 52 times that of typical worker, report finds

The Guardian

time4 days ago

  • Business
  • The Guardian

CEO pay at UK's top companies is 52 times that of typical worker, report finds

The chief executive of a FTSE 350 company is paid 52 times as much as a typical worker, according to the latest measure of inequality between bosses and their employees. Median pay for FTSE 350 chief executives was £2.5m last year, which works out at 52 times a median worker's pay, according to a new report from the High Pay Centre campaign group. The widest gap was found at the cleaning, security and waste management group Mitie, whose chief executive, Phil Bentley, was paid £14.7m, 575 times more than a middle-earner in the 2023-24 financial year. Tesco ranked the second highest for the same period among FTSE 350 companies legally obliged to report the figure. With a package worth nearly £10m, the supermarket's chief executive, Ken Murphy, was paid 431 times more than a typical Tesco worker that year. The most recent ratio, for the company's 2024-25 financial year, was lower, at a multiple of 373 as Murphy's pay fell to £9.2m. Luke Hildyard, the director of the High Pay Centre, said a maximum pay ratio between chief executives and workers could help ensure that all workers received 'a fair reward for their contribution to business success'. The pay-gap ratio was even starker among FTSE 100 companies, where the median pay of chief executives was 78 times higher than their median employees. When compared with the lowest-earning quartile, the multiple rose to 106. The High Pay Centre suggested all companies should be required to publish their CEO-to-worker pay gaps in their annual reports, and include pay figures for outsourced workers in their calculations. Its research found the pay-gap ratio between chief executives and workers had decreased in the past year, and that there had been growth in pay for the lowest-earning workers. However, the thinktank noted this could also have reflected changes such as a smaller workforce due to job cuts, outsourcing or relocation. Tensions have been growing in the City over big pay packages for chief executives. Last month Centrica, the owner of British Gas, faced a shareholder rebellion after it handed its boss a multimillion-pound pay packet while energy bill payers struggled with record levels of debt. Before the vote, the leading proxy adviser Institutional Shareholder Services recommended against supporting Chris O'Shea's pay rise as it 'was materially above those given to the wider workforce'. Elsewhere, the pay package of Marks & Spencer's chief executive, Stuart Machin, jumped to more than £7m just weeks before the cyber-attack that rocked the retailer. It marked a 40% rise compared with the £5.1m he took home a year earlier, partly as a result of a sharp rise in performance-linked bonuses. Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion Bosses in the banking sector are also expected to get bumper pay packages this year after the removal of the UK banker bonus cap in late 2023. NatWest Group proposed a 43% increase in the maximum for its chief executive, Paul Thwaite, taking his total compensation to as high as £7.7m for the year. Meanwhile, his counterpart at Barclays, CS Venkatakrishnan, could earn up to £14.3m, a 45% increase. HSBC has suggested a 43% rise for Georges Elhedery, for a maximum payout of about £15m. A spokesperson for Tesco said its most recent pay-gap ratio reflected a remuneration policy for executive directors tied to the performance of the business. They said: 'We remain committed to a competitive and fair reward package for all colleagues. Earlier this year we announced a further increase in hourly pay rates, equivalent to an investment of more than £900m over the last three years.' A spokesperson for Mitie said its high multiple reflected a one-off award for its chief executive after the acquisition of another business, Interserve. They said: 'The acquisition saved 29,000 jobs, Mitie's revenues have more than doubled from £2.2bn to £5.1bn, and the share price has risen 125%. 'Our colleagues have also benefited from Mitie's strong financial performance during that time through the gifting of over £19m in free shares as well as £30m of value created for colleagues who participated in the 'save as you earn' scheme during that time.'

Poorer and rural Australians are sicker, yet they get less healthcare. It's a broken system
Poorer and rural Australians are sicker, yet they get less healthcare. It's a broken system

The Guardian

time4 days ago

  • Health
  • The Guardian

Poorer and rural Australians are sicker, yet they get less healthcare. It's a broken system

When it comes to health, Australia is an unfair country. Poorer Australians die about 7.5 years earlier than the wealthiest, and spend more years living with chronic disease. People from some communities, such as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, face an even higher risk of illness. This injustice has deep, gnarled roots, from disadvantage and discrimination to poor air quality and unhealthy diets. But there's one cause that's more visible, and should be easier to fix: people missing out on healthcare they need. A recent comparison of 10 wealthy countries found Australia's healthcare system rates highly overall, but ranks second-last on access to care, beating only the notoriously inequitable US system. Poorer and rural Australians are sicker, yet they get less care. It's a perverse pattern that applies to most types of healthcare, including dentists, medicines, mental health care and allied health. And a Grattan Institute report released this week compiles new data showing that access to specialist doctors, such as psychiatrists and cardiologists, is also highly unequal. We mapped access to public and private specialist care and found that people in the poorest areas receive about a quarter fewer services than those in the wealthiest areas. That means poorer communities are missing out on tens of thousands of appointments every year, despite being sicker than average. Rural Australians get about half as much care as people living in major cities. In many rural areas, specialist care is extremely scarce. Half of remote and very remote areas receive fewer than one specialist service per person each year, something not seen anywhere in Australia's major cities. Why does this happen? First, specialist fees are high, and there's not much relief for poorer people. Unlike at the GP, disadvantaged people are rarely bulk billed when they see a specialist. Three-quarters of people earning less than $500 a week paid a bill for at least one specialist visit in 2023. That's not much less than for people on the median household income, who paid a bill 84% of the time. And when the bills come, they're high and rising. The average fee charged has risen by nearly three-quarters since 2010. Again, poorer people aren't getting much of a discount: the median cost for the poorest people who pay fees is $170. That's not much lower than the $220 figure for people on an average income. Second, there aren't enough public appointments where they're needed most. Free clinics in public hospitals deliver just one-third of all specialist appointments. And as private services decline, public services don't fill the gap. Compared with the average, the communities in the bottom fifth of the nation get 26 fewer private services per 100 people. But they only get an extra three public services per 100 people. As a result, waiting lists for public clinics can be very long – often many months longer than clinically recommended. Put these two problems together and you get a broken system. In much of Australia, private care costs are high, and there's no good alternative if you can't pay. The result is missed or delayed diagnoses, preventable illness and avoidable hospital visits. To reduce fees and wait times, Australia needs to reform specialist training, reduce unnecessary referrals, and crack down on excessive fees. But an essential part of the solution is much more investment in specialist clinics in underserved areas. Governments must invest for impact by targeting need. They should combine data on public services, private services, and community needs, then rebalance our skewed service system and put care where it's needed most. To make it happen, health ministers should commit to a guaranteed minimum level of specialist care in the national health funding deal currently being negotiated between federal and state governments. It would cost about $500m to fill the worst gaps in the country. To maximise the impact, public clinics should change the way they operate. There are many opportunities to improve their efficiency, but too often, they aren't the focus of hospital investment and improvement plans. State governments should give public clinics more funding and support to adopt best practices. To make sure that expansion and improvement efforts are working, all governments should publicly report waiting times, as some states already do. The unfair gaps in access to healthcare in Australia are deep and longstanding, but they're not inevitable. Without real change, we can expect fees and wait times to rise further as Australians get older and sicker. But with targeted public investment, we can make sure that specialist care doesn't become a special privilege. Peter Breadon is the health program director at Grattan Institute Elizabeth Baldwin is a Senior Associate in Grattan Institute's Health Program

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store