According to Crikey, 17 of the highest paid executives in Australia earned between $22 million and $86.6 million in the past three years, despite their companies generally underperforming the benchmark.

United States President Barack Obama recently enacted the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which restricts executive remuneration for companies in receipt of funds from the Troubled Assets Relief Program.

Closer to home, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and Finance and Deregulation Minister Lindsay Tanner have expressed the desire to introduce tighter regulations in Australia.

"The Prime Minister has set out five principles which we seek to insert into the international debate on regulatory reform. One of which is tackling the culture of institutionalised greed and excessive executive salaries," Tanner said last year.

However, as yet there have been, unlike in the US, no formal changes announced. There is movement, but so far it is slow and unbinding.

Currently the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) is working with the government to develop a principle-based framework for executive remuneration structures.

As we wait for APRA's response, a number of prominent bodies have weighed into the debate.

The Responsible Investment Association Australasia (RIAA) has called for wider discussion on executive remuneration.

"The current debated about binding shareholder votes for executive remuneration is too narrow and is also not the answer for real and effective change," RIAA executive director Louise O'Halloran said.

Future Fund chief executive David Murray has added his voice to the debate, saying have to step up their responsibility in the financial sector.

Last month, the Australian Institute of Company Directors (AICD) released a set of guidelines on executive remuneration for publicly-listed companies.

So it seems at the moment the best response Australia has to the problem of executive remuneration is a set of non-binding rules.
 
However, APRA will soon release draft principles and a response paper and expects to finalise its approach by the end of 2009. Perhaps this will provide more clarity on what is an important and contentious issue.