(THIS SHELL INSIDER WAS NOT THE SOURCE OF THE LEAK)
John
Some of the more scrupulous people in Shell (who incidentally are also recipients of the largesse) are questioning why the rules made three years ago for a bonus relating to 2005 have been changed retroactively to turn a 0% bonus award for 2005 into a 65% award. According to all the internal criteria, 0% was the correct figure. Those behind the changes to the rules are also allegedly recipients of the award.
I don’t seem to remember any reserves related bonuses being repaid when the reserves were restated, so why are the rules for the 2005 bonus payments being rewritten now?