The Sense of an Ending (film)

The Sense of an Ending is a 2017 mystery drama film directed by Ritesh Batra and written by Nick Payne, based on the 2011 novel of the same name by Julian Barnes. The film stars Jim Broadbent, Charlotte Rampling, Harriet Walter, Billy Howle, Emily Mortimer and Michelle Dockery.
The film had its world premiere at the Palm Springs International Film Festival on 2 January 2017. It was released in the United States on 10 March 2017, by CBS Films and Lionsgate, and in the United Kingdom on 14 April 2017, by StudioCanal.
Plot.
Elderly divorcé Anthony 'Tony' Webster runs a London camera shop and lives quietly. He receives a letter from the estate of Sarah Ford, the mother of his 1960s university girlfriend Veronica. To his surprise she has left him £500 and a diary, which is still with Veronica.
In flashback, we see that Tony's Sixth Form classmate, Robson, died from what many believed to be suicide after his girlfriend became pregnant. Tony's friend, the highly intelligent Adrian Finn, told their history teacher that in the absence of documentary evidence nobody will ever know the true reason for his suicide. Later, at the University of Bristol, Tony met Veronica, who introduced him to photography as a hobby. On a visit to her family, Veronica's attractive mother Sarah flirted with him but warned him "not to let Veronica get away with too much". As Tony left, Sarah gave him a horizontal wave at waist level. Tony was unsure if it was a flirtatious goodbye or a warning signal.
Veronica later broke up with Tony, having never had full sexual intercourse with him - until after their breakup. He received a letter from Adrian requesting his blessing for his new relationship with Veronica. At first he decided to respond positively, but then wrote an angry reply, writing of her being damaged and how even her mother had warned him about her, and wishing they would have a child which would pay for its parents' sins. He never heard back from either of them. Tony's two best friends from Sixth Form later informed him that Adrian, who had seemed happy and in love at first, had committed suicide. Tony believed that Veronica could have met Adrian through her brother Jack, who like Adrian studied at the University of Cambridge (but had previously told Tony he did not know Adrian), but they pointed out that Adrian and Veronica met through Tony.
In the present day, Tony tells his ex-wife Margaret about his relationship with Veronica for the first time. Tony reconnects with his two Sixth Form friends and they help him locate Veronica online. She is still angry at him, has burned Adrian's diary, which might have explained why he committed suicide, but hands him the angry letter he had written to her and Adrian. Spying on Veronica, Tony sees her with an intellectually disabled middle-aged man who bears a striking resemblance to, and is called, Adrian. Tony learns that Adrian Jr. is not Veronica's son but her younger half-brother, and guesses he is the son of Adrian Sr. and Sarah.
Tony's daughter Susie, whose pregnancy has been a subplot throughout the film, gives birth to a healthy boy. Tony writes to Veronica, apologising to her for what he did.
Production.
On 8 February 2015, it was announced that Ritesh Batra would next direct a drama for Origin Pictures and BBC Films, based on the Julian Barnes' novel "The Sense of an Ending", and scripted by Nick Payne. On 11 May 2015, Jim Broadbent was cast in the film for the lead role, which BBC Films and FilmNation Entertainment would be financing, and FilmNation also handling the international sales. David M. Thompson and Ed Rubin of Origin Pictures would finance the film. On 6 August 2015, an ensemble cast was announced including Charlotte Rampling, Harriet Walter, Emily Mortimer, Michelle Dockery, Billy Howle, Freya Mavor, and Joe Alwyn. Lipsync Productions would also co-finance the film along with BBC Films and FilmNation Entertainment. On 8 September 2015 CBS Films acquired the US distribution rights to the film.
Filming.
Principal photography on the film began on 8 September 2015 in London and Bristol. Filming lasted for seven weeks.
Release.
It had its world premiere at the Palm Springs International Film Festival on 2 January 2017. The film was released in the United States on 10 March 2017 and in the United Kingdom on 14 April 2017.
Reception.
Box office.
"The Sense of an Ending" grossed $1.3 million in the United States and Canada and $3.2 million in other territories for a worldwide total of $4.5 million.
Critical response.
On review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, the film has an approval rating of 76% based on 119 reviews, with an average rating of 6.42/10. The site's critical consensus states, "Anchored by a strong starring performance by Jim Broadbent, "The Sense of an Ending" proves consistently gripping even as it skims the narrative surface of its literary source material." On Metacritic, the film holds a score of 61 out of 100, based on 24 critics, indicating "generally favorable reviews".


Charles Finch, 4th Earl of Winchilsea

Charles Finch, 4th Earl of Winchilsea PC (26 September 1672 – 16 August 1712) was a British peer and Member of Parliament, styled Viscount Maidstone until 1689. He was the son of William Finch, Lord Maidstone (son of Heneage Finch, 3rd Earl of Winchilsea) and Elizabeth Wyndham.
From 1702 to 1703 he served as Ambassador Extraordinary to Hanover. In 1702, he was appointed Vice-Admiral of Kent, and in 1704, Lord Lieutenant and Custos Rotulorum of that county. He was dismissed from all his Kentish offices in 1705. In 1711, he was sworn of the Privy Council and was appointed First Lord of Trade. Upon his death in 1712, he was succeeded as Earl of Winchilsea by his uncle, Heneage Finch.


Deposit insurance

Deposit insurance or deposit protection is a measure implemented in many countries to protect bank depositors, in full or in part, from losses caused by a bank's inability to pay its debts when due. Deposit insurance systems are one component of a financial system safety net that promotes financial stability.
Overview.
Banks are allowed (and usually encouraged) to lend or invest most of the money deposited with them instead of safe-keeping the full amounts (see fractional-reserve banking). If many of a bank's borrowers fail to repay their loans when due, the bank's creditors, including its depositors, risk loss. Because they rely on customer deposits that can be withdrawn on little or no notice, banks in financial trouble are prone to bank runs, where depositors seek to withdraw funds quickly ahead of a possible bank insolvency. Because banking institution failures have the potential to trigger a broad spectrum of harmful events, including economic recessions, policy makers maintain deposit insurance schemes to protect depositors and to give them comfort that their funds are not at risk.
Deposit insurance institutions are for the most part government run or established, and may or may not be a part of a country's central bank, while some are private entities with government backing or completely private entities. There are a number of countries with more than one deposit insurance system in operation, including Austria, Canada (Ontario & Quebec), Germany, Italy, and the United States.
Local details.
According to the IADI, as of 31 January 2014, 113 countries have instituted some form of explicit deposit insurance up from 12 in 1974. Another 41 countries are considering the implementation of an explicit deposit insurance system.
Africa.
Central Africa.
Banks in the Economic Community of Central African States are eligible for an international system called the Deposit Guarantee Fund in Central Africa (FOGADAC). Although the system is well capitalized, details of its failure response process remain to be determined.
South Africa.
South Africa's (DIS) covers depositors up to R100,000.
Americas.
Brazil.
In Brazil, the creation of deposit insurance was authorized by Resolution 2197 of 1995, the National Monetary Council. This standard mandated the creation of a protection mechanism for credit holders against financial institutions, called "Credit Guarantee Fund" (FGC). Currently, the FGC is regulated by Resolution 4222 of 2013. The Fiscal Responsibility Act prohibits the use of public funds to finance the losses, so it is formed exclusively by compulsory contributions from the participating institutions. The warranty is limited to R$250,000 per depositor. More recently, the Guarantor Credit Union Fund (FGCoop) was created, in order to protect depositors of credit unions and cooperative banks. As the FGC, the FGCoop guarantees up to R$250,000 and consists of compulsory contributions of cooperatives and cooperative banks.
Canada.
Canada created the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation (CDIC) in 1967. It is similar to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in the United States. Since 1967, 43 financial institutions have failed in Canada and all were members of CDIC. There have been no failures since 1996. Information on the Canadian system can be found at http://www.cdic.ca. Insurance is restricted to registered member institutions, and covers only the first C$100,000 in very specific categories of accounts. Credit unions and Quebec's "caisse populaire" system are not insured federally because they are created under provincial charters and backed by provincial insurance plans, which generally follow the federal model. Funds in a foreign currency and guaranteed investment certificates with a term of longer than 5 years held in a CDIC-registered financial institution are insured as of April 30, 2020. Funds in foreign banks operating in Canada may or may not be covered depending on whether they are members of CDIC. Some funds in the Registered Retirement Savings Plan or Registered Retirement Income Fund at their bank may not be covered if they are invested in mutual funds or held in specific instruments like debentures issued by government or corporations. The general principle is to cover reasonable deposits and savings, but not deposits deliberately positioned to take risks for gain, such as mutual funds or stocks.
The roots of this reform can be traced back to the 19th century, such as the Upper Canada's financial problems of 1866, the North American panic of 1872 and the 1923 failure of Toronto's Home Bank, symbolized today by Casa Loma. Historically, in Canada, regional risk has always been spread nationally within each large bank, unlike the uneven geography of US unit banking, layered with savings & loans of regional or national size, which in turn disperse their risk through investors. Generally speaking, the Canadian banking system is well regulated, in part by the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (Canada), which can in an extreme case close a financial institution. That and Canada's tight mortgage rules mean the risk of bank failures similar to the US are much less likely.
Mexico.
In Mexico, the Instituto para la Protección al Ahorro Bancario (IPAB) is the deposit insurance set up by the country for account holders in Mexico. It insures up to 400,000 UDIs (Unidad de Inversión), the equivalent of $2,406,702.40 pesos for each account. In 1981, the General Law of Credit Institutions and Auxiliary Organizations provided for the creation of a fund to protect credit obligations assumed by banks.
United States.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) is the deposit insurer for the United States. Through the 1920s, there were various sub-national deposit insurance schemes. The United States was the second country (after Czechoslovakia) to institute national deposit insurance when it established the FDIC in the wake of the 1933 banking crisis that accompanied the Great Depression.
Most credit unions in the United States are insured by the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), a separate federally-chartered agency, while others rely on private insurance arrangements. The FDIC and NCUA each insure up to $250,000 for each owner at institution. Separately from these, the Securities Investor Protection Corporation provides limited asset protection, but not insurance, for the cash and securities of the customers of failed investment brokerages.
In Massachusetts, the Depositors Insurance Fund (DIF) insures deposits in excess of the FDIC limits at state-chartered savings banks.
European Union.
Directive 94/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 1994 on deposit-guarantee schemes requires all member states to have a deposit guarantee scheme for at least 90% of the deposited amount, up to at least 20,000 euros per person. On October 7, 2008, the Ecofin meeting of EU's ministers of finance agreed to increase the minimum amount to 50,000. Timelines and details on procedures for the implementation, which is likely to be a national matter for the member states, was not immediately available. The increased amount followed on Ireland's move, in September 2008, to increase its deposit insurance to an unlimited amount. Many other EU countries, starting with the United Kingdom, reacted by increasing its limit to avoid that people transfer savings to Irish banks.
In November 2007 a comprehensive report was published by the EU, with a description and comparison of each Insurance Guarantee Scheme in place for all EU member states. The report concluded that many of the schemes had restricted the appliance of guarantees to retail consumers, usually private individuals, although small or medium (SME) businesses were also sometimes placed into the retail category. All schemes are do not apply for big wholesale customers under the argument the latter are often in a better position than retail customers to assess the financial risks of particular firms with whom they engage or are able themselves to reduce their risk by using several financial banks/institutes. The report recommends this practice to continue, as limiting of the scheme's to "retail customers (excl./incl. SME businesses)" helps to reduce the cost of the scheme but also helps to increase its available funds for those who actually need the guarantee when it is activated for the protection of claimants.
By country.
From October 2008, many EU countries increased the amount covered by their deposit insurance schemes. Since these amounts are typically encoded in legislation, there was a certain delay before the new amounts were formally valid.
Footnote: (*) According to Art. 7 (1a) of Directive 94/19/EC all EU Member States were expected to increase the amount to EUR 100,000 as of 31 December 2010. This is the case in all EU countries. For countries with non-EURO currency the limits are near to EUR 100,000 e.g. in Denmark DKK 750,000 which is near to that limit, depending on EUR-DKK rate.
Rest of Europe.
Albania.
Deposit insurance in Albania is handled by the Albanian Deposit Insurance Agency ("Agjencia e Sigurimit të Depozitave") and covers deposits up to a maximum of ALL2,500,000 (around US$23,000).
Andorra.
Deposit insurance in Andorra is handled by the "Institut Nacional Andorrà de Finances" and covers deposits up to a maximum limit of EUR100,000 made by natural persons and legal entities, irrespective of their nationality or domicile.
Belarus.
Deposit insurance in Belarus is handled by the Agency of Deposit Compensation ("Агенцтва гарантаванага пакрыцця банкаўскіх укладаў") and covers 100% of deposits, but only those belonging to individuals, not organizations.
Iceland.
Deposit insurance in Iceland is handled by Depositors' and Investors' Guarantee Fund ("Tryggingarsjóður") and covers a minimum of 20,887 euros. However, the fund was drastically insufficient to cover the bank failures of the 2008–2012 Icelandic financial crisis, particularly Icesave. This case shows the limits of deposit insurance in protecting against systemic failure (as opposed to the collapse of a single bank or other institution), especially when a small country offers banking to international customers.
Liechtenstein.
Deposit insurance in Liechtenstein is handled by the Liechtenstein Bankers Association and covers deposits up to CHF100,000.
Monaco.
Banks operating in Monaco participate in the French deposit guarantee scheme (i.e., the Fonds de Garantie des Depôts (FGD)) on the same conditions as French banks.
Norway.
Deposit insurance in Norway is handled by the Norwegian Banks' Guarantee Fund ("Bankenes sikringsfond") and covers deposits up to 2 million NOK.
Russia.
Russia enacted deposit insurance law in December 2003 and established the national deposit insurance agency (DIA) in 2004. Until 2004, the Russian banking system was divided: obligations of state-owned Sberbank were guaranteed by law, while other banks were not insured in any way, creating an unfair advantage for Sberbank. The law addresses only individuals' deposits. Maximum compensation is limited to 1,400,000 roubles (equivalent to approximately 21,800 US dollars or 19,500 Euro at September 2016 exchange rate). As at January 2008, DIA funds exceeded 68 billion roubles (2.8 billion US dollars). There were 15 "insured events" (bankruptcy cases involving DIA intervention) in 2007 with resulting payout reaching 350 million roubles.
The agency is set up as a state-owned corporation, managed jointly by Central Bank and the government of Russia. DIA membership is mandatory requirement for any bank operating with private investors' money. Central Bank of Russia used the admission of banks into the DIA system to weed out unsound banks and money launderers. The murder of Andrey Kozlov, the Central Bank executive in charge of DIA admission, was directly linked to his non-compromising attitude to money launderers.
San Marino.
Deposit insurance in San Marino is handled by the Central Bank of San Marino and covers deposits up to EUR50,000.
Switzerland.
Switzerland has a privately operated deposit insurance system called Deposit Protection of Swiss Banks and Securities Dealers. It guarantees up to CHF 100,000 per bank customer per bank. Membership is compulsory for all banks and securities dealers that are regulated by the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA).
It had covered depositors in 1993 in the case of the failure of Spar- und Leihkasse Thun SLT, Thun. The next cases happened in 2007 with the liquidation of AB FIN SA (a securities dealer) in Lugano and with Kauphting (Luxembourg) SA, Geneva branch which was closed on October 9, 2008. Clients of this bank received the payments (at the time up to CHF 30 000 per customer) within three weeks.
Turkey.
Deposit insurance in Turkey is handled by Savings Deposit Insurance Fund ("Tasarruf Mevduatı Sigorta Fonu") and covers a maximum of 100,000 TL.(approx. $15,000)
Ukraine.
The system of deposit guarantee in Ukraine operates according to the Law of Ukraine «On Households Deposit Guarantee System» of February 23, 2012, Ref. number 4452-VI. and covers deposits up to 200,000 UAH (about 7,550 US dollars or 6,660 Euro at September 2016 rates).
United Kingdom.
Deposits in the United Kingdom are protected by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme, which will cover losses of up to £85,000 per account or up to £170,000 for joint accounts. The Scheme is funded through a levy paid by financial services companies which are members of the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority relative to the number of protected deposits they hold.
British Isles Offshore.
In response to the financial crisis in 2008, both Guernsey and Jersey introduced deposit compensation schemes. The Guernsey scheme was enacted in November 2008 and offers compensation of up to £50,000 per depositor, subject to an overall cap of £100 million in any five-year period. The scheme does not cover company or, with minor exceptions, trust accounts. The Jersey scheme was enacted in November 2009 and offers a similar level of protection.
The Isle of Man bank depositors' insurance scheme was introduced in 1991, to cover 75 percent of the first £15,000 per depositor per bank, but it was the October 2008 crisis-stricken Icelandic government's seizure of Kaupthing Bank hf in Iceland after the United Kingdom suspended the trading licence of Kaupthing's British subsidiary that compelled a radical revision of deposit insurance in the Isle of Man. Unable to secure reserves held by Kaupthing hf in Iceland or Kaupthing's British subsidiary to facilitate customer withdrawals, Kaupthing Singer and Friedlander (Isle of Man) Ltd. saw its Isle of Man banking licence suspended after operating less than a year, compelling the firm to request to be wound up. The Isle of Man government called an emergency session of the Tynwald parliament, which voted unanimously to bring the Isle of Man depositors' compensation scheme into line with the newly enlarged scheme in the United Kingdom, guaranteeing with immediate effect 100 percent of the first £50,000 per depositor per bank, and studying amendments for the subsequent inclusion within the scheme of corporate and charitable accounts. The Isle of Man government also pressed the Icelandic government to honour Kaupthing hf's irrevocable and binding guarantee of all depositors' funds held by Kaupthing, Singer and Friedlander (Isle of Man) Ltd.
Oceania.
Australia.
The last bank failure in which Australian depositors lost money (and then only a minimal amount) was that of a trading bank, the Primary Producers Bank of Australia, in 1931 (Fitz-Gibbon and Gizycki 2001). Since the early 1930s, banking sector problems have been resolved without losses to depositors.
On 12 October 2008, as part of the response to the financial crisis of 2008, Australia set up the "Financial Claims Scheme" (FCS) to provide a government guarantee of 100% of all deposits with ADIs for three years in the event of an ADI failing. This was subsequently reduced to a maximum of $1 million per depositor per ADI. This measure was in addition to the mandates of APRA and ASIC to monitor Australian authorised deposit-taking institutions (ADIs), including banks, to ensure that their risks do not compromise the safety of depositors’ funds. As part of the scheme, Australia was registered as a private US corporation. From 1 February 2012, the guarantee was reduced to $250,000 per customer per ADI group. The guarantee also applies to foreign-owned banks, but only to deposit accounts in Australia and only with funds in Australian dollars.
The "Australian Government Guarantee Scheme for Large Deposits and Wholesale Funding" ended in 2015.
New Zealand.
New Zealand announced the Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme, an opt-in scheme for retail deposits, on October 12, 2008. An extension to the scheme was announced on 25 August 2009 and the scheme ran until 31 December 2011. From 1 January 2012 bank deposits in New Zealand are not protected by the Government.
Asia.
Bangladesh.
In Bangladesh, a deposit insurance scheme was first introduced in 1984 by dint of "The Deposit Insurance Ordinance 1984". In July 2007, the Ordinance was repealed by an Act passed by the parliament called "The Bank Deposit Insurance Act 2000", which currently administers the Deposit Insurance system in Bangladesh. In accordance to the Act Bangladesh Bank is authorized to carry out a Fund called the "Deposit Insurance Trust Fund(DITF)". The DITF is administered and managed by a Trustee Board. In case of winding up of an insured bank, every depositor of the bank will be paid an amount not exceeding to BDT 100,000 as per "The Bank Deposit Insurance Act 2000".
China.
China recently introduced preliminary proposals for a bank deposit insurance system, which will eventually cover all individual bank accounts for up to $81,000. With the vast majority of Chinese savers holding far less than the maximum, and the central bank has calculated that 99.6% of depositors will be protected in full. The plan is expected to take effect in January, 2015, and is intended by Chinese officials to increase certainty and help customers better assess risks and protect the nation's financial stability in the event of a crisis. China has one of the world's biggest deposit bases and as of October, bank deposits totaled about $18.2 trillion.
India.
India introduced Deposit Insurance in 1962. The Deposit Insurance Corporation commenced functioning on January 1, 1962 under the aegis of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI). 1971 witnessed the establishment of another institution, the Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. (CGCI). In 1978, the DIC and the CGCI were merged to form the Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation (DICGC).Deposit insurance was hiked from ₹100,000 (one lakh rupees, approximately $1,325 as of March 2020) to ₹500,000 (5 lakh rupees, approximately $6,625 as of March 2020) in 2020.
Hong Kong.
Hong Kong Deposit Protection Board is an independent and statutory institution formed to manage and supervise the operation of Deposit Protection Scheme. The maximum protection amount of deposit was HK$100,000 in 2006 (when the Hong Kong Deposit Protection Board was set up), it is now with a limit up to HK$500,000 (or equivalent in RMB or other foreign currency).
Japan.
Deposit Insurance Corporation of Japan, founded in 1971 and based in Tokyo, oversees this function for institutes other than agricultural and fishery co-operative .
For agricultural and fishery co-operative and Norinchukin, oversees this.
Malaysia.
Malaysia introduced its Deposit Insurance System in September 2005. Malaysia Deposit Insurance Corporation (MDIC) (Malay: "Perbadanan Insurans Deposit Malaysia (PIDM)") is a statutory body formed under the Malaysia Deposit Insurance Corporation Act ("Akta Perbadanan Insurans Deposit Malaysia"). All commercial and Islamic banks, including foreign banks operating in Malaysia, are compulsory member institutions of PIDM. The maximum coverage limit is RM250,000 per depositor per member institution. Islamic accounts, joint accounts, trust accounts and accounts of sole proprietorships, partnerships or persons carrying on professional practices are separately insured up to the RM250,000 limit.
PIDM is also mandated to provide incentives for sound risk management in the financial system, as well as promote and contribute to the stability of the financial system.
For more information about MDIC, visit MDIC's website at http://www.pidm.gov.my
Mongolia.
During the 2007 global financial crises, Mongolia extended blanket guarantee to protect all bank deposits. At the time the guarantee coverage was 1.7 times higher than the state budget of the country.
On 10 January 2013, the Parliament of Mongolia adopted the Law on Insurance for Bank Deposits that establishes a mandatory insurance scheme for the protection of bank monetary deposits.
Philippines.
Deposits in the Philippines up to PHP500,000 is covered by the Philippine Deposit Insurance Corporation [PDIC]. It was raised from the previous insurance coverage of PHP250,000.
Singapore.
Deposits in Singapore is covered by the Singapore Deposit Insurance Corporation [SDIC] up to a maximum of $75,000 per bank or finance company for each individual depositor.
South Korea.
South Korea covers bank deposits by Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation (KDIC) to maximum of 50 million wons per bank per each individual. KDIC, founded in 1996 just before the East Asian financial crisis of 1997, proved its effectiveness through the crisis and gradually upgraded its capacity over the years.
Deposits made to credit unions of South Korea are not covered by KDIC, but the Korean Federation of Credit Cooperatives (KFCC) and the National Credit Union Federation of Korea (NCUFK) regulates their respective members and covers deposits to the same amount covered by KDIC.
Taiwan.
Deposits in the Taiwan up to NT$3,000,000 is covered by the Central Deposit Insurance Corporation. It was raised from the previous insurance coverage of NT$1,500,000. (or equivalent in dollar or other foreign currency).
Thailand.
The complete deposit protection system was introduced in Thailand by the establishment of the Deposit Protection Agency (DPA) on 11 August 2008, in accordance with the Deposit Protection Agency Act B.E. 2551. The objectives of the Agency as specified by law are providing protection to deposits in the financial institution system, administration of institutions subject to control under the Financial Institutions Businesses Act, and liquidation of financial institutions whose licenses have been revoked. Deposit in Thailand was fully guaranteed until 10 August 2011. From 11 August 2011 until 10 August 2012, the coverage dropped to 50 million baht per depositor per bank. Since then coverage has been limited to THB one million per depositor per bank.
Economic impact.
When a nation state has a deposit insurance scheme, foreign investors (aka non-resident bank depositors) are more likely to "passively deposit" larger amounts of money into the banks of that nation state.
Having a "bank deposit insurance scheme" (for all practical purposes) guarantees that a nation state will more likely have a higher rate of passive foreign investment (within the margin of insurable amount).
Passive foreign investment in a nation state's finance system allows for more lending to be made when global finance system conditions constrict the amount of lendable money. There has been substantial research done over the years on the impact on "foreign investment" of "bank deposit insurance schemes".
Deposit insurance enables banks to increase the money supply, without it underfunded banks might suffer a bank run which is prevented by the insurance. This encourages inflation.
Criticisms.
Detractors of deposit insurance claim the schemes introduce a moral hazard issue, encouraging both depositors and banks to take on excessive risks. Without deposit insurance, banks would compete prudently for deposits because depositors would prefer safe banks over risky banks to guard their money. With deposit insurance, banks can take excessive risks because depositors do not fear for their deposits' safety and thus do not move their money to safer banks. The risks are shared by all banks, safe or risky.
If deposit insurance is provided by another business or corporation, like other insurance agreements, there is a presumption that the insurance corporation would either charge higher rates or refuse to cover banks that engaged in extremely risky behavior, which not only solves the problem of moral hazard but also reduces the risk of a bank run.
The Bibby plan, which avoids the problem of moral hazard but still prevents bank runs, would have the state provide deposit insurance, with the banks paying regular premiums to the state reflecting the extent of the deposit insurance. The level of the deposit insurance could be at the choice of the banks, and the inherent risk in that particular bank. The plan would allow some element of differentiation between banks in terms of investment risk and in the level of insurance offered.


Privatization in the United States

State, county, and city economies are constantly challenged in running government operations. A government-run sector may transfer the responsibility for carrying out the service and/or resource management activities and responsibilities to the private sector.
Privatization can be a solution for dealing with particularly problematic aspects within a government's administration. Often municipalities will turn to privatization to solve an issue. A city or county may, for example, have vehicle maintenance cost increases that exceed revenues consistently and look to privatization as a means of controlling increasing costs. It may not, however, address other factors that are contributing to the cost increases or revenue shortfalls, such as regulation. Over time, compensation, for instance, could be a problem that also applies to other aspects of the government.
Definition.
Privatization is the process of transferring ownership of a business, enterprise, agency, charity or public service from the public sector (the state or government) or common use to the private sector (businesses that operate for a private profit) or to private non-profit organizations. In a broader sense, privatization refers to transfer of any government function to the private sector - including governmental functions like revenue collection and law enforcement.
The term "privatization" has also been used to describe two unrelated transactions. The first is a buyout, by the majority owner, of all shares of a public corporation or holding company's stock, privatizing a publicly traded stock, and often described as private equity. The second is a demutualization of a mutual organization or cooperative to form a joint stock company.
Privatization has also been defined as the sale of public assets to private companies who then provide that service back to the community or municipality at a competitive price. The whole idea behind the privatization issue is that the new provider will be able to provide the same service but at a reduce cost to the public. The municipality and the community is thought to benefit from the reduce cost that was associated with operating the public facility.
Classes of privatization.
The four major classes of privatization options can be characterized as
In the United States, the contracting of management and operations to a private provider (outsourcing) has been more common than the sale of utility assets to private companies. No major U.S. city has sold its utility assets in recent decades, although some smaller water utilities have done so.
Medicare and Medicaid managed care.
In the United States, under the Medicare managed care the government pays a managed care organization (MCO) a fixed amount called the "capitated rate" for all medical services received by a beneficiary in a given period. Enrollment in the programs has increased substantially since 1990; in 2002 60% of Medicaid beneficiaries and 12% of Medicare beneficiaries were being treated by MCOs. Private sector involvement in Medicare and Medicaid is not limited to MCOs; private doctors, hospitals, nursing homes provide medical care; reimbursement claims are processed by private intermediaries; and peer review organizations, utilization review committees and accreditation organizations like JCAHO are staffed by private medical personnel.
One of the primary recipients of U.S. outsourcing contracts is Maximus Inc., which administers Medicaid and Medicare, as well as the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), welfare-to-work, child support enforcement, and other government programs.
Welfare privatization.
Homeless shelters and food banks are run by private organizations, who also provide treatment services, operate Head Start programs and work with child welfare agencies. Privatization of welfare system expanded in 1996, when the Aid to Families with Dependent Child (AFDC) program was replaced with the Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF) program. Welfare services that are often privatized include workforce development, job training and job placement are often privatized.
Public education.
There is also some private sector involvement in the public education system including charter schools, Educational Management Organizations (EMOs), and school voucher programs. EMOs are usually for-profit and manage charter schools and sometimes traditional public schools as well. The United States Supreme Court upheld school voucher programs against an Establishment Clause challenge in "Zelman v. Simmons-Harris".
Private prisons.
In the US, private prison facilities housed 12.3% of all federal prisoners and 5.8% of state prisoners in 2001. Contracts for these private prisons regulate prison conditions and operation, but the nature of running a prison requires a substantial exercise of discretion. Private prisons are more exposed to liability than state run prisons.
Foreign affairs.
Both for-profit and non-profit entities are tasked with various responsibilities related to the US foreign aid budget such as providing emergency humanitarian relief, development assistance, as well as post-conflict reconstruction efforts. Similarly, private entities have started to perform tasks that have traditionally been regarded as falling within the government's diplomatic and military authority like participating in peace negotiations, military training, intelligence gathering and other security services or combat-related missions. Many of the military interrogators at Abu Ghraib prison were provided by a private contractor and lacked formal military training; this was subsequently identified as a contributing factor to detainee abuse at the prison by the Fay report.
The United Nations uses private subcontractors as well, and in some cases, "failed states" have relied on private entities extensively for a range of tasks including building critical infrastructure, managing social services programs and using private military companies during the course of armed conflicts.
US Constitution.
The United States Constitution only constrains state action and, with few exceptions, "erects no shield against merely private conduct, however discriminatory or wrongful". Gillian Metzger writes:
Adequately guarding against abuse of public power requires application of constitutional principles to every exercise of state authority, regardless of the formal public or private status of the actor involved: 'It surely cannot be that government, state or federal, is able to evade the most solemn obligations imposed in the Constitution by simply resorting to the corporate form' and thereby transferring operation of government programs to private hands"
Even if private actors cannot be held accountable through the traditional constitutional mechanism, they may be bound by other regulatory or contractual requirements. Tort law might be another avenue of protection, and some may argue that this protection could be even more effective as public agencies and employees usually enjoy some degree of immunity from civil liability.
Criticism.
Historically, governments have at times turned government-run institutions into privately held corporations or simply abolished the publicly run institution in order for privately owned competition to enter and compete in the market in question. However, critics often point out that historical methods of privatization were quite different than modern methods. For example, in the United States in the 19th century, a corporation might be chartered by a public entity, such as a municipality, for a very specific purpose (for example, constructing New York's Central Park) with significant constraints on its purpose, task, and duration. Such a corporation would then often cease to exist after its purpose had been fulfilled. This kind of public-private partnership differs in significant ways from a common modern form, where publicly held services or resources might be handed over to a private company with few stipulations and for an indefinite period of time.
Critics of privatization also charge that lucrative contracts may be given to political allies, relatives or friends of public officials and that subsequently, these contractors may not qualified to do the work and/or may provide less quality to the general public. For example, in 2006 the LA Times reported on this pattern in an article stating that for "Indianapolis, New Orleans, Atlanta and other cities, privatization has been accompanied by corruption scandals, environmental violations and a torrent of customer complaints."
Another criticism of privatization, particularly in regard to municipal services such as water utilities, is that some municipalities have seen unacceptable increases in prices of services while seeing also a decrease in the quality of service and level of maintenance of the utility. For example, in Jacksonville, Florida, a company called United Water Resources owned and operated the municipal water system. After monthly bills increased in 1997 by almost $10 per month, and further requests for rate hikes later as well. The municipality's public utility, JEA, decided to buy the water system for $219 million, projecting that this would actually save customers 25% on monthly bills. On the other hand, publicly managed utilities have occasionally reported trouble as well. The New York Times reported in 2004 that a consortium of citizen's groups had won a suit against the city of Los Angeles to repair 488 miles of sewer lines and conduct other maintenance.
Factors that lead to privatization.
There are several leading factors that contribute to municipal or county governments outsourcing. Economics in the format that governments can operate in a more manageable and effective manner. Public administrations have been criticized for their lack of effective service. The quality of service may be slow and employees may not be held accountable for their responsibilities. The view by the public is that public organizations are not friendly, and removed from high-quality public service, the lack of public relations, and training show in the inability of their personnel to deal with the public.
Privatization is widely thought to be a valuable policy instrument that leads to a greater good. Privatization of public resources injects new value into public assets and increases the privately held capital base of a country. Governments that implement privatization as part of their reforms use it as a mechanism to pursue a variety of objectives, both macroeconomic and fiscal. Governments undertaking privatization have pursued a variety of objectives. In some cases, privatization is a means of achieving gains in economic efficiency, given the extensive prevalence of poor economic performance of public enterprises in many countries and limited success with their reform. Privatization can also be a mechanism for improving the fiscal position, particularly in cases where governments have been unwilling or unable to continue to finance deficits in the public enterprise sector.
The decision as to whether to transfer ownership or operations of a public water utility to a private firm is complex. Immediate economic questions such as “Won't privatization increase customers’ monthly water bills?” are accompanied by larger and longer-term questions relating to public health, employment, political control, environmental issues, and relations with other city services.


Kofi Wampah

Henry Akpenamawu Kofi Wampah is a Ghanaian economist and former Governor of the Bank of Ghana.
Academic background.
Wampah schooled at Hohoe E. P. Secondary School for his GCE 'O' Level certificate and Konongo-Odumase Secondary School for his GCE 'A' Level certificate. He proceeded to the University of Ghana where he obtained his degree in Economics and Statistics in 1977. Dr Wampah holds a master's degree (1983) and a PhD (1986) in Economics from McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Professional life.
Wampah started his working life at the Bank of Ghana in September 1986. His first appointment was as a Deputy Manager of the Bank. From February 2001 to February 2006 he was the Head of the Research Department of the Bank. During this period he worked as part-time staff at the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Washington, DC, as a Special Appointee from May to December 1998 and thereafter with the Monetary Operations Division of the Monetary and Exchange Affairs Department and the Africa Department. In 2002, he was appointed Director of the Research and Statistics Department at the West African Monetary Institute. While at the Institute he oversaw the planning and implementation of the Macroeconomic Convergence monitoring programme of the West African Monetary Zone. Wampah served first as the Acting Chairman of Ghana International Bank Public Limited Company and the Director from 25 November 2009.
Governorship.
In April 2009 he returned to the Bank and became the first deputy governor of the Bank of Ghana by appointment of President John Evans Atta Mills. In 2012 he was appointed as the Acting Governor of the Bank of Ghana. This was because when President Mills died, his vice-president, John Mahama, took over as president. Kwesi Amissah-Arthur, the then Governor of the Bank of Ghana, was confirmed by the Parliament of Ghana as Vice-President of Ghana, creating a vacancy in the Bank's leadership. On 4 April 2013, he was sworn in as the substantive Governor of the Bank of Ghana by President John Dramani Mahama. He served until 2017.
A prolific speaker, Wampah has presented before numerous national and international fora, particularly in the areas of monetary policy, public finance, and development economics. He is currently the Chairman of Central Bank Governors in West Africa. He replaced the head of the Nigerian Central Bank, Sanusi Lamido Sanusi. As chair of this subregional group, he coordinates the activities of central bank governors from five other countries namely Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Gambia, Liberia and Guinea.


ADVA Optical Networking

ADVA Optical Networking SE is a European telecommunications vendor that provides network equipment for data, storage, voice and video services. ADVA has a global workforce of over 1,800 employees and its FSP 3000 has been deployed in more than 250 carriers and 10,000 enterprises.
Corporate history.
ADVA was founded in 1994 by Brian Protiva. It established its headquarters in Martinsried near Munich and its first production facility in Meiningen. Funded by Egora Holding, the company's initial focus was on the development of wavelength division multiplexing technology designed to provide enterprises, including banks, insurance firms and utilities, with high-bandwidth network connectivity.
Acquisitions.
In 2014, ADVA Optical Networking acquired Oscilloquartz. Following the purchase, ADVA continued to expand and develop Oscilloquartz's portfolio of end-to-end synchronization technology.
In 2016, ADVA acquired Overture.
In 2017, ADVA Optical Networking acquired its US rival, MRV Communications in an effort to increase its cloud access portfolio and strengthen its Network Edge portfolio. Following the acquisition, one MRV executive: Scott St. John, was appointed to ADVA's board.
Market share.
In 2009, Infonetics Research listed ADVA as the industry leader (#1 position) in the Ethernet Access Device (EAD) space with a market share of 20 percent, based on 2008 revenues.
In 2016, ADVA was listed as the industry leader (#1 position) in Ovum's data center interconnect (DCI) global market share report, with the largest market share in both the metro ICP/CNP and enterprise categories.
Recent history.
ADVA's annual revenues surpassed half a billion euros in 2016, peaking at 556.7 million euros.
ADVA demonstrated the world's first 100G quantum safe transport over 2800 km on 13 June 2018.
ADVA's FSP 3000 TeraFlex terminal broke industry records on 24 July 2019, achieving 200Gbit/s per wavelength transmission over a distance of 5,738 km with 2.5bit/symbol, and 500Gbit/s over 1,016 km with 5bit/symbol modulation. The trial was conducted with partners: the Poznan Supercomputing and Networking Center (PSNC), EENet of HITSA and Tele2 Estonia. Marketwatch
Sustainability.
In 2016, ADVA announced it was joining the Science Based Targets Initiative (SBTi), an organisation set up by the World Resources Institute. ADVA joined the initiative with the aim of contributing to the global effort to keep the average global temperature below a 1.5 °C rise beyond pre-industrial levels, in line with the 2015 Paris Agreement. In 2017, ADVA submitted its targets, which were primarily focussed on reducing indirect consumer emissions, to the SBTi. The SBTi validated ADVA's targets in 2019.
On October 8, 2020, ADVA announced a new commitment via a press release: it would achieve a 67% reduction in emissions from its operations by the year 2032.


Midland Red

Midland Red was a bus company that operated in The Midlands from 1905 until 1981. It was one of the largest English bus companies, operating over a large area between Gloucester in the south and Derbyshire in the north, and from Northampton to the Welsh border. The company also manufactured buses.
History.
Origins.
In 1899 the British Electric Traction (BET) company acquired the assets of the Birmingham General Omnibus Company, which had been formed three years earlier to acquire a number of horse bus operations in Birmingham. When BET ordered new buses for Birmingham the next year, they were painted red to make them stand out. In 1902 BET acquired the City of Birmingham Tramways Company, which operated horse buses as well as trams.
The Birmingham & Midland Motor Omnibus Company was formed by local businessmen in November 1904 to operate motor bus services in Birmingham. When the directors failed to attract sufficient investors, BET acquired control of the new company, and in 1905 transferred its local horse bus operations to it. The company also acquired a motor bus company which had started in 1903. BMMO started operations under its own name in July 1905. However, the company experienced problems with its motor buses, and in 1907 reverted all its motor bus services to horse bus operation.
In 1912 the company purchased some Tilling-Stevens petrol-electric buses. Further motor buses followed, and by June 1913 only 17 horse buses remained. The company adopted for its motor buses the red livery used by Birmingham General, and the buses carried the fleetname "Midland". They soon acquired the nickname Midland Red.
Expansion outside Birmingham.
By 1912 the Birmingham Corporation Tramways had used its statutory powers to acquire the city's tramways which it did not already own, and wanted to consolidate the operation of bus and tram operations in the city. Since it was going to be difficult for BMMO to expand in the city, it reached agreement with the corporation to operate services from outside Birmingham into the city and transfer its services within the city to the corporation. The company then expanded outside Birmingham, and moved its headquarters to Bearwood in Smethwick.
During World War I, the company took over BET operations in Worcester and elsewhere, and after the war opened depots in Walsall, Coventry, Wolverhampton, Hereford, Stafford, Banbury, Bromsgrove, Shrewsbury, Nuneaton, Leamington Spa and Leicester. During the 1920s the tramways owned by BET in the Black Country were gradually replaced by Midland Red buses.
In 1930, the Great Western Railway and the London Midland & Scottish Railway together acquired 50% of the company. The few GWR bus services in the area were transferred to Midland Red.
Coach services.
Midland Red started express coach services in 1921 with routes to Weston-super-Mare and Llandudno. Coach services expanded, and in 1934 Midland Red became a founder member of the Associated Motorways consortium.
Coach services were heavily reduced during World War II, but expanded again after the war. When the M1 motorway opened in 1959, Midland Red started non-stop express services between Birmingham and London, and later between Coventry and London. For the service, the company developed Britain's first high-speed motor-coach. A fleet of ten, capable of speeds of up to , were built at the company's workshops at Edgbaston. The opening of the M5 motorway enabled the operation of express services between Birmingham and Worcester.
Nationalisation.
When the railways were nationalised forming in 1947 under the Transport Act 1947, Midland Red became 50% state-owned. In 1968, BET sold its UK bus interests to the government, and on 1 January 1969 the company became the largest subsidiary of the National Bus Company (NBC). The livery was later changed from a deep red to the NBC corporate poppy red.
In 1973 the garages (with the exception of Digbeth Coach Station, Bearwood and Cradley Heath) and routes within the West Midlands county were transferred to the control of the West Midlands Passenger Transport Authority, leaving Midland Red with country and local routes mainly in Derbyshire, Herefordshire, Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire, Shropshire, Staffordshire, Warwickshire and Worcestershire and express services.
Rebranding.
From 1977 onwards, after extensive passenger research the company was rebranded into local area names under the Viable Network Project, something that was soon renamed as the Market Analysis Project and widely adopted throughout NBC and elsewhere in the bus industry. Each new network spawned a localised brand, as follows:
Breakup.
On 6 September 1981, Midland Red was split into six new companies:
Privatisation.
As part of the privatisation of the National Bus Company, the companies were sold:
Bus manufacture.
In 1912 the company bought its first Tilling-Stevens petrol-electric vehicles. Tilling-Stevens became the main supplier of bus chassis to the company which, under its Chief Engineer LG Wyndham Shire, adapted and developed the designs to its own requirements, finally designing a vehicle it intended to construct itself.
Between 1923 and 1969, the BMMO built most of the buses it operated: up to 1940 these were called SOS (rumoured to stand for Superior Omnibus Specification), and some models were supplied to other bus companies associated within the British Electric Traction (BET) group, namely Trent, PMT and Northern General. After 1940, the vehicles were identified by the company's initials, BMMO, and supplied solely for the BMMO company's own use. Codes later used for buses were FEDD (Front Entrance Double Decker), REDD (Rear Entrance Double Decker), Coaches were initially classified "ONC", but later used a prefix of "C" – or "CM" for Motorway coaches.
Single Decker models after the war were numbered S6, then S8 through S23, Double Decker models D1 through D10. The D10 was, in some opinions, the pinnacle of BMMO bus design – a double decker with front entrance/rear exit and an underfloor engine, but only two were produced. AD2, GD6 and LD8 were exceptions to the normal designation system – these codes referred to batches of respectively AEC, Guy and Leyland vehicles acquired when the manufacturing operation could not meet the heavy demand. Individual buses were numbered from (around) 2000 to 5900 – registrations (usually) incorporated the last three numbers of the serial, and a letter prefix of three letters ending in "HA" ( a Smethwick origin registration mark). This relationship did not apply to the limited number of buses gained as a result of acquisition of other operators.
Bus manufacture, overhaul and accident repair was carried out at Carlyle Works, adjacent to the Rotton Park Reservoir in Edgbaston, Birmingham. Nearby to the works was BMMO's head office, in Vernon Road, Edgbaston.
Historical list of Midland Red garages.
Other short time-span garages (either owned or rented) included: Birmingham, Ladywood Road (Five Ways Inn yard); Coventry, Sandy Lane; Cradley, (GWR station yard); Halesowen, Mucklow Hill (GWR station yard); Hereford, Bridge Street (Black Lion Yard); Kingswinford, The Portway; Leicester, Frog Island; Leicester, Hastings Road; Leicester, Welford Road; Nuneaton, Burgage Walk (ex NWMO&T Co); Nuneaton, Heath End Road; Nuneaton, the former Empire theatre; Sedgley, WDET Co depot; Shrewsbury, Abbey foregate (ex Allen Omnibus Co); Shrewsbury, Roushill; Stafford, Co-operative Street; Wellington, Mansell Street.


Ford Romania

Ford Romania is an automobile manufacturing company operated by Ford of Europe, located in Craiova, Romania.
History.
20th century.
Royal Garage imported Ford cars as early as May 1911. Shortly, other agencies such as Colin & Co., Leonida & Co., Noel S.A.R, and Raf S.A.R.
expanded the market. Numerous political figures owned Ford cars. Among them was Ion I. C. Brătianu, whose daughter used to call her car Forduţa. Ford cars were
an instant success story, thus between May 1911 and November 1912, Royal Garage already sold 106 Ford cars. On December 8, 1920, Collin & Co. requested on behalf of the Ford Motor Company the permission to build an assembly plant in Romania.Unfortunately, Vintilă Brătianu, “notoriously anti-American”, rejected the proposal to the regret of the people directly involved as well as the public opinion. In October 1927, William G. Collins (in the future, assistant manager in Alexandria, Egypt) renewed the proposal for establishing an assembly plant in Constanţa. Finally, in 1931, Ford Motor Company opened a subsidiary in Bucharest. On March 1, 1935; Ford Romania addressed a request for building a new plant on Calea Floreasca, the architect was P. Em. Miclescu, with the contribution of Ioana Golescu. On September 26, 1934, Ford Romania bought from Imobiliara Chrissoveloni 7,535 square meters, at the price of lei 2,335,850 (the price for one square meter was lei 310).Furthermore, Ford Romania intended to receive the advantages granted by the law encouraging the national industry, to sign a treaty for a period of ten years, and to import 2,500 units per year, and the ability to increase this number if the demand would be higher. Lastly, the company requested to be taxed on parts rather than built-up units. On May 6, 1936, the Government reduced the privileges granted to Ford, thus the number of imported units dropped to 100; the names of the parts were individually identified, such as paint, valve oil. On May 15, 1936, the assembly plant situated in Bd. V. Craiu (Calea Floreasca) opened. The capacity of this assembly plant was 2,500 cars per year and different reparations at 6,000 cars yearly, the power, the rough material and the employees: „250 workers, from whom five foreign foremen, five technicians and a Romanian draughtsman. The technical manager was a Romanian engineer (L. D. Greceanu). The administrative management was to be held by a general manager, Austrian citizen, helped by five managers, four Romanian citizens and a Swiss one, who are helped at the office by twelve bookkeepers and twenty-six administrative clerks, five of them foreign citizens”.
Ford company came to Romania in 1935, after a negotiation with the Romanian government. The company started the first car production line in Eastern Europe at the Ford Română S.A.R. facility in Floreasca neighborhood of Bucharest. It assembled 1935 Ford (V8-48 and V8-68 models), 1937 Ford (V8-74/78, V8-81A/82A, V8-91A/92A and V8-01A/02A models), in Standard and De Luxe versions, Mercury Eight, and Fordson trucks.
The plant produced until World War II when it did only repair activities for the army vehicle fleet. After the war, in 1948, the company was nationalized, and changed its activity to become, in 1960, "Automatica", a manufacturer of electrical equipment and automation.
21st century.
In modern times the company is located in Craiova, in the former Oltcit car factory, later Daewoo Motors facility in Romania (as Daewoo Automobile Romania), which Ford acquired in 2008 from the Romanian government.
Vehicle production at the plant began in September 2009 with the Ford Transit Connect, and later with the Ford B-Max. Engine production at the plant includes three- and four-cylinder versions of Ford's EcoBoost engine family. The plant has a production capacity of 300,000 units per year and it is the country's third company by value of exports.
In March 2016, it was announced that the Ford EcoSport will be built at the Craiova plant starting from the autumn of 2017, moving production for the European market from the current plant in Chennai, India. This happens on the background of the growing market for the SUV segment in Europe, and will bring an investment of €200 million to the factory.


Hussain Nizam Shah I

Hussain Nizam Shah I (1553–1565) was the preeminent ruler of the Ahmadnagar Sultanate and the leading figure of the coalition of the Deccan Sultanates during the Battle of Talikota. Notably, Hussain Nizam Shah was responsible for taking prisoner and beheading Rama Raya of Vijayanagara after the Battle of Talikota.
Family.
Issue.
By Khunza Humayun:
By Surya:


Long service leave

In Australia and New Zealand, long service leave (LSL) is an employee entitlement to an additional vacation on full pay after an extended period of service with an employer. In Australia, employees are generally entitled to long service leave over and above their annual leave if they work for a particular employer for a certain length of time. A common entitlement in Australia is that employees who remain with the one employer for ten years are entitled to three calendar months' (ninety days) paid LSL, less on a "pro rata" basis, the longer they stay with that employer. When a worker ceases work with an employer, he or she is usually entitled to be paid the amount of LSL entitlement not taken on termination on a pro rata basis, though usually after a minimum period of service.
It remains one of the great entitlements for working Australians and one that is peculiar to the Australian labour market. The rules governing long service leave entitlements vary for different employees depending on their circumstances and the relevant jurisdiction.
The Institute of Actuaries of Australia estimated that the total value of long service leave benefits in Australia was around $16.5 billion in 2001.
There has been a debate in Australia about the protection of employee entitlements (including long service leave) in the event of employer insolvency, with some high-profile cases involving employees losing benefits that had been accrued.
Nowadays, long service leave is ingrained in Australian culture and is specified by state-based and some federal legislation. It is often not taken when it falls due, leading to calls to reduce long-service entitlement in the public sector.
Long service leave entitlements.
Workers in Australia are entitled to long service leave based on legislation of the relevant state or territory, as follows:
Portable LSL.
Within a limited number of industries, such as construction, coal mining, contract cleaning industries and the public sector, it is possible to transfer long-service leave entitlements from one employer to another, as long as the employee remains in the same state. Known as portable long service leave this is done mostly through specific legislated schemes which employers in those industries pay into, and which administer the funds for employees.
The Australian Senate has recently moved to inquire into portable long service leave schemes. The inquiry will be conducted by the Education and Employment References Committee. The committee will consider how portable schemes might be structured and what role the Australian Federal Government might play in helping to establish a scheme. The committee will also have to evaluate the effect that the differing State long service entitlements will have on a national scheme, as the current state based long service leave provisions are all practically different. As of 11 November 2015, the committee had yet to meet and set dates for submissions and reporting.
History.
Long service leave is a benefit peculiar to Australia and New Zealand (and possibly some civil servants in India), and arises from the colonial heritage of each country. There is also a similar system of sabbatical leave in Finland. Long service leave developed from the concept of furlough, which stems from the Dutch word "verlof" (meaning "leave"), and its usage originates in leave granted from military service.
In Australia, the benefit was first granted to Victorian and South Australian public servants in the 1860s. The nature of the leave allowed public servants, after 10 years' service, to sail "home" to England or elsewhere, safe in the knowledge that they would be able to resume their positions upon their return to Australia.
Section 37 of the Victorian Public Service Act of 1862 reads: "Where any officer desires to visit Europe or some other distant country if he have continued in the civil service of the colony at least ten years and have not been reduced for misconduct or deprived of leave of absence under this Act the Governor in council may grant to him leave of absence upon half-salary for a period not exceeding twelve months but for such period of absence such officer shall not be entitled to receive any annual increment."
Over the period from 1950 to 1975, the benefit spread beyond the public service, mainly as a result of pressure from non-government employees seeking comparability with public servants.
In the 19th century, furlough as a benefit as it is now known, was a privilege granted by legislation to the Colonial and Indian Services.


Alexandre Jamar

Alexandre Marie Auguste Jamar (6 November 1821 – 15 August 1888) was a Belgian businessman, liberal politician and former governor of the National Bank of Belgium (NBB) from 1882 until 1888. From 1868 to 1870, he was Minister of Public Works, in the government of Walthère Frère-Orban.
Career.
Born in Brussels on 6 November 1821, Jamar started his career at the age of 17, when he became a partner in the family printing business of his brother. Later on he became a commissioner for the ' and had a seat on the first management board of the ' and the "".
Jamar became a censor at the NBB in 1865 and a member of the discount committee of the NBB. In 1870 he became director of the NBB and in 1882 governor of the National Bank of Belgium. During his time in office he had to deal with the consequences of an economic depression. In addition he had to deal with problems within the Latin Monetary Union, caused by the refusal of Belgium to sign the new convention of 1885. His experience in the printing business resulted in better quality banknotes.
Jamar died in Brussels on 15 August 1888.