News

Protest Demonstration to Save Lake Farm Country Park.

2012-01-27T14:00:59Z

I have discovered that the Council has been considering its plans to build on Lake Farm in secret. The Council has secretly commissioned and received a feasibility study on building on Lake Farm and has kept the report of the feasibility study secret. The Councillors also decided that this issue would only be considered in the secret part of its Cabinet meeting this week (Thursday) giving no opportunity for local residents to have sight of the reports to councillors, to comment on the proposal or to attend the meeting and even listen to the debate. Councillors sitting in secret to carve up local community assets isn’t democracy it is a dictatorship. Over 150 local residents attended a public meeting I convened earlier this month to protest at the Council’s proposals to build on our country park but we have heard nothing from the Council. There has been no public consultation and no discussion with local schools or the community on alternative sites for a school to avoid destroying our local green belt land. As a community we are not going to be ridden over roughshod in this way. We pay our rates that fund these councillors and we demand that decisions are in public, the feasibility study and non commercial reports are published and that local residents have their say.
Local residents are holding a protest demonstration on Botwell Common on Saturday 25th February meeting at 11am at the Skylark Statue on the Common, Botwell Lane. Come and join us in this fight to save our country park.

Worries About the Effect of Local Police Cuts

2012-01-27T10:39:48Z

Local MP John McDonnell has Expressed his Worries about Police Cuts in London.

The latest Home Office figures published this week have revealed that police numbers have dropped by over 8000 nationally with 1,710 officers being cut in London.I am now really worried at what the Government is doing to our police force. The cuts to the Metropolitan Police are deeply concerning given that serious crime is rising in our area. In the London area, robbery and theft from a person are up 14.8%, rape up 8% and residential burglary up 8.4%. We are also faced with local Police Officers being called away to police the Olympics and the Royal Jubilee celebrations in central London. I fear for our community as result of these cuts. The Government needs to think again.

Local Elections for Youth Parliament

2012-01-17T14:58:01Z

Every year young people between the ages of 11 and 18 in Hillingdon have the chance to vote for their local representatives to the national Youth Parliament. The Youth Parliament speaks up for young people in this country and advises the Government about the concerns of young people and what issues and policies young people want the Government to address. I met Soila Apparicio, who is standing this year to be one of the three local representatives to the Youth Parliament. Soila is a student at Ruislip High School and her family lives in Hayes. She is brimming with ideas on what issues need to be tackled to improve the lives of young people in our area and clearly is committed to working hard for young people in our area if she is elected. You can tell that from this short interview with her that I filmed. Voting is between 6th and 10th February. People have three votes. Voting is online and voting slips can be obtained from your school or youth centre or by contacting the council. There are two candidates from Hewens College in Hayes and I will try and catch up with them too.

Nestles Closure in Hayes is a Devastating Blow to Local Economy

2012-01-16T13:10:15Z

Nestles has announced today that it will be closing its Hayes’ factory by the end of 2014 with the loss of 230 jobs in our area. This is a devastating blow to our local economy and our community. I am deeply shocked at this decision by the company and so upset for the workers that are losing their jobs and the consequences for their families. Nestle has been part of our local history, providing skilled jobs to local people. It will be sorely missed. I will be meeting with the company and the trade union to secure the best redundancy compensation possible and assistance in securing alternative employment, including retraining, for the workers at risk. We must also not lose this valuable site for employment and I will be doing all I can to attract new employers to this site.

Government Announcement on High Speed Rail Today

2012-01-10T10:42:28Z

The Government has announced its decision today to go ahead with the construction of a high speed line from London to Birmingham, with the prospect of it being extended eventually to the north of England and Scotland. As a result of all the local campaigning the Government has amended its plans to put the track travelling through the north of the borough into tunnels. There is still no announcement of any route for a Heathrow spur. This is left to Phase 2 of the process when proposals will be brought forward on the options for extending the line from Birmingham to the north and any direct connection to Heathrow. It is clear that the Government is willing to minimise damage to communities in urban areas by the use of tunneling. The plans to tunnel in the north of the borough is a victory for local campaigners but failing to consult on the whole route just increases the uncertainty about the possible Heathrow link and the project overall. This is no way to plan a railway or any major infrastructure project. Further inforamtion is available on the Department of Tranmsport website http://www.dft.gov.uk/highspeedrail

Debate on Controlling Directors’ Pay and Bonuses

2012-01-09T14:49:02Z

Seven years go I was the first MP to raise in Parliament the need to control bankers’ bonuses. For the Early Day Motion I put forward in the Commons on this issue I gained the support of only about 30 MPs. I raised the issue every year after that with roughly the same levels of support. No leadership of any of the major political parties supported me. In July last year in the debate on last year’s Finance Bill I tabled an amendment calling upon the Government to make the vote of shareholders on the pay of their company’s executive and directors’ pay legally binding. Once again the leaderships of the main political parties did not support the measure. This week all the major parties, including the Prime Minister are calling for action on this. Funny old world! This is a film and text of my speech in the Finance Bill debate last year. Slide the scale to 05.29.53 for the start of my speech.

John McDonnell’s Attempt in Debate on Finance Bill in July 2011 to Secure Amendment to introduce Shareholder’s Binding Vote over Executive and Directors’ Pay
John McDonnell (Hayes and Harlington) (Lab): I congratulate the hon. Member for Amber Valley (Nigel Mills) on moving his new clause and on the deployment of his expertise for the benefit of the whole House. He could well be a candidate for tax personality of next year, but I would advise him that it might help his prospects if he were to lay off the Reagan quotes.
I wish to speak to the amendments tabled in my name. Amendment 15 deals with directors’ salaries and payments, and proposes a binding vote by shareholders on such payments. Amendment 16 deals with the
4 July 2011 : Column 1308
publication of information on the salaries and bonuses of directors in all public limited companies. Amendment 17 deals with a number of issues relating to enterprise investment schemes, and it would be helpful to receive certain information from the Government in order to assess those schemes in future.
I want to deal with salaries and bonuses first, as they have been a matter of contention in the House for a number of years now. Statements have been made by leading members of all political parties expressing concern, if not outrage, at the levels of increase in the pay of company directors. The Leader of the Opposition said in a recent speech that the
“danger today is that pay and performance have become detached…Over the last 12 years, chief executive pay in Britain’s top companies has quadrupled, while share prices have remained flat.”
The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills has called for greater disclosure on pay and bonuses and their link to company performance. He was reported as hitting out at the
“ethics of the wild east”
in the City. He described some directors’ pay and bonus settlements as “ridiculous”, “outrageous” and “rewards for failures”. I agree wholeheartedly with the Leader of the Opposition and the Secretary of State on this matter. I believe that the Secretary of State’s sentiments have been echoed by the Prime Minister himself.
My amendments seek to address the fact that the present system for the control of directors’ pay and bonuses by shareholders is not working. The current system for judging and rewarding remuneration in major companies is clearly not linked to performance, and evidence for that now abounds. The Business Secretary was referring to the dramatic increase in the remuneration of directors and executives of the top 100 companies. In 1998, that remuneration was 45 times the pay of the average employee in the company. By 2010, it was 145 times the average pay, and if it continues at that rate, it is predicted to reach 214 times the average salary in the company that the director or chief executive controls.
At the moment, the chief executives of the FTSE 100 companies have total remuneration packages averaging £4.2 million a year. Last August, it was reported that the financial crisis had resulted in ordinary employees’ salaries being frozen in at least one third of Britain’s biggest companies, yet the average pay of the top directors increased by £500,000. Hewitt New Bridge Street has reported that the typical bonus has now increased from 90% to 120% of salary, and the total remuneration survey conducted by pay and reward consultants MM&K showed evidence of a total disconnect between rewards, actual performance and shareholder value. Performance-related pay has just gone through the roof, however, with extremely complex packages being devised. The average top award under share allocation schemes and incentive schemes in the FTSE 100 has risen from 174% to 328% of salary.
In some instances, outrageously large awards have been agreed even before the director has demonstrated any value to the company. An example is Lloyds, which gave its new chief exec, António Horta-Osório, a welcome package worth close to £13.4 million simply for joining the bank. This is a bank that we, as taxpayers, now own. Lord Oakeshott, the Liberal Democrat peer, said that taxpayers would be “appalled” at paying someone
4 July 2011 : Column 1309
“£5,000 a day, just for turning up at the office for the next three years”.
I wholeheartedly agree with him on that. Ironically, Sir Victor Blank, the former chair of the Lloyds group, described top bankers’ pay in The Sunday Telegraph—not a newspaper I regularly read—as “unconscionable” and warned that the widening pay gap could lead to dangerous divisions in society and more strikes. I shall quote him directly. He said:
“You can’t have an ongoing widening gap between the top pay and the average pay…I think we are at a time now where you have a certain amount of unrest over pensions and other issues where if we don’t start early to have a degree of moderation in the levels of pay we risk more industrial unrest than we have had.”
I could not agree more.
Some shareholders have echoed those concerns. It was perhaps best expressed by a woman shareholder who was disgruntled at the Cable and Wireless annual general meeting. She complained—and it was a heartfelt plea from the floor:
“All the money and all the profit seem to be going towards the salaries of the Board, and I did not necessarily think that they were worth that amount of money.”
I believe this is undermining confidence and engendering cynicism—and, of course, division and disenchantment—in the whole process.
Clearly, the billowing packages of directors’ pay, bonuses and overall remuneration has to be addressed. The Government have acknowledged that, as have all parties in the House. My amendments are designed to prompt action and to make action more speedy and decisive.
If we are to tackle this issue, we need to understand why it is occurring. The Joseph Rowntree charitable trust funded an independent inquiry, the High Pay Commission, to which I believe a number of Members have submitted their views over the last year. It has looked at the drivers behind the trend of increases in directors’ and executives’ pay and remuneration. It provides some understanding of how the system operates to determine directors’ remuneration and puts forward the reason for the excesses.
Governments have addressed the issue over the last two decades. Legislation has been there to establish the current system of corporate governance. For publicly listed companies, it is based first on the establishment of a remuneration committee on every board to advise on appropriate remuneration; secondly, on disclosure; and, thirdly, on the shareholder having a vote on the pay and remuneration of directors. All the companies with a premium listing of shares are required on the Financial Services Authority listing rules to report on how they have applied the UK corporate governance code in their annual reports and accounts. This includes explaining how the pay was arrived at and determined.
The remuneration committees that have developed since the 1990s grew up as a result of pressure from successive Governments. They aim to overcome the conflict of interest in directors setting their own salaries. The Greenbury report on corporate governance called for them to be fully independent and to comprise wholly non-executive directors. The committees agree the pay packages for top execs and produce the report that will eventually go before shareholders.
4 July 2011 : Column 1310
The problem identified by the High Pay Commission and others is that the non-execs that sit on the remuneration committees are often executive directors in other companies, so setting benchmarks of remuneration is important for them. There have been charges of cronyism as executives and directors appoint each other to each other’s remuneration committees—a relationship of incestuous self-interest—while the non-execs sit alongside executive directors supporting them and unwilling to challenge them on pay. In recent years, we have seen the emergence of remuneration consultants who advise the remuneration committees on the setting of pay, but these are unregulated and they are often working for or are commissioned by the company directors on whose salaries they are giving advice.
On disclosure, quoted companies must publish directors’ remuneration reports. These appear in the annual report and are put to shareholders for a vote. This information is required to be put to companies as an ordinary resolution for approval at the AGM. The problem, however, is the UK corporate governance code guidance, according to which:
“A significant proportion of executive directors’ remuneration should be structured so as to link the rewards to corporate and individual performance. There should be a formal and transparent procedure for developing policy on executive remuneration and for fixing remuneration packages of individual directors.”
8.15 pm
The Hampel report back in 1988 argued that the remuneration reports were excessively detailed and that features of the packages were
“rendered obscure to all but the expert reader.”
The situation has got worse in recent years—worse than ever before. The data produced for the reports to the shareholders are often impenetrable and the remuneration packages are extremely complicated and sophisticated. There is a real fear of shareholders gaining any understanding of the package of remuneration, including the levels, and it has been argued that the reports are less about enlightening the shareholders than camouflaging pay and bonus levels within the complex schemes proposed. Publication does not cover all companies, so it is extremely difficult for shareholders to hold the directors and executives to account, simply because the information published is too complex and impenetrable.
As for the shareholder vote, international and national regulations and guidance on corporate governance place great emphasis on shareholders having the ability to express their opinions on the remuneration of directors. It is enshrined in OECD principles of corporate governance. In the European Union, the publication of remuneration levels and performance criteria is recommended, as is investors having a vote on remuneration.
Within the UK, the UK corporate governance code sets out the standard of good practice on reporting to shareholders on remuneration and regulations also require shareholder votes on the total remuneration packages of company executives and directors. The vote itself, however, is purely advisory and the failure to pass the remuneration report does not invalidate the payments made. In fact, the FSA reforms of the banking sector have gone further on the basis of EU principles and those of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. Further help is provided on disclosure, but there is still no authoritative binding vote that will determine the acceptability of pay packages.
4 July 2011 : Column 1311
When shareholder advisory votes were initially introduced, they had some effect. The best example is GlaxoSmithKline, as the remuneration report was defeated—but that is very rare. The average vote against the remuneration report nowadays is 5.6% on the all share index. Shareholders are limited by the amount of information available, particularly in view of diversifying portfolios that have a range of investments, making it hard to find time to study and intervene in each case.
My amendments are designed to address some of these issues, particularly the weaknesses within the current governance structure. I am trying to make the existing structure work more effectively so that shareholders can begin to control the excesses of directors’ pay and remuneration that have developed in recent years.
Amendment 20 says simply that prior to the corporation tax changes taking effect, the Government should enact legislation to ensure that all public companies
“publish the…salaries and bonuses of their directors.”
We have the opportunity this evening to hear the Government’s future plans on publication in order to tackle the complexity of the current arrangements.
Amendment 15 goes further in an attempt to strengthen the hands of shareholders by making the advisory vote on remuneration packages binding. In this way, it will enable shareholders to take control of their own companies once again and ensure accountability. It will enable shareholders to hold not only directors but remuneration committees to account.
Mr Barry Sheerman (Huddersfield) (Lab/Co-op): Will my hon. Friend’s amendments help with the sort of situation we faced with HBOS? It was driven into the buffers by its highly paid executive team, who seemed to lose nothing while the shareholders lost everything.
John McDonnell: My amendments would go some way to ensuring that the information is published, enabling the Government to look in more detail at such information, while also enabling shareholders to have at least some opportunity to hold the directors to account. As I said, the advisory vote system worked initially, but it certainly has not worked in recent years, as the HBOS example demonstrates. Having a binding vote will give the shareholders some authority. The amendments are an attempt to redress the current imbalance of power between the shareholder and the board. It will not solve all the problems of directors being unaccountable on pay or bonus awards, but it would put another weapon in shareholders’ hands to tackle the issue.
Amendment 17 relates to enterprise investment schemes and accountability. Just as shareholders need information to hold company boards to account, the House should ensure that taxpayer’s money and tax concessions are allocated wisely to groups in society and that value for money is achieved. The amendment would invite the Government to justify in more detail future enterprise investment schemes on the basis of past performance of previously approved schemes. The amendment would seek information from the Minister on the total cost of tax relief with regard to the tax income forgone, the number of jobs created by the companies that have gained tax relief under the schemes, and the number of companies that have failed after the tax relief has been given—calculating the cost of each job created compared with the cost of the tax relief given. The information
4 July 2011 : Column 1312
provided in the paperwork in relation to the Budget and the Finance Bill is not clear. The Treasury briefing on enterprise investment schemes and venture capital trusts sets out the proposals but provides no analysis of past measures and their performance. The Treasury Committee, in its comments on tax relief for EIS under the Finance Bill , suggested:
“The measure also needs to be viewed alongside the other proposals for EIS and whether the existing EIS conditions encourage investment in growth businesses.”
The Treasury Committee, therefore, points us in the direction of undertaking a proper value for money exercise on the proposals.
The amendment would enable the Minister to respond to that. Before we venture into such schemes, particularly EIS, we must ensure that their objectives are achieved with value for money, and the information is not currently available for us to make that judgment.

Public Meeting to Save Lake Farm Country Park

2012-01-09T14:20:23Z

Public Meeting to Discuss the Threat to Lake farm and Botwell Common
Botwell Social Centre Hall, Botwell Lane, Hayes (in between Botwell School and Church)
18th January at 8pm
The Council is planning to build a new primary school on Botwell Common and Lake Farm Country Park. This will destroy one of the last areas of green belt, open space in our area and set a precedent for the erosion of all the green belt in the south of the borough.The Council has argued that it needs a new primary school and yet has refused to consider properly alternative sites. Many believe that the Council is driven by financial motives and not by local educational needs. Many suspect that if it builds a school on our green belt park, it will be able to sell off other sites in the south of the borough to use these resources in the north of the borough. Yet again our community will suffer by this asset stripping of our area.There is also a fear that once a primary school is built, taking up nearly half of the existing park, the council will inevitably come back at a later date to build a secondary school on the remainder of the park.The Council is trying to rush through this attack on our green belt park. Already drilling has taken place on Botwell Common as part of the tests for construction on the site. We now need to mobilise urgently a large scale community campaign to prevent the Council destroying our local green belt open spaces.This meeting will discuss how we can work together to organise a local campaign to halt this disastrous proposal. Please come along and please tell everyone you know to join us in this campaign.

Nursery Under Threat at Hayes Campus of Uxbridge College

2012-01-09T12:53:13Z

Local parents approached me before Christmas with the shock news that the Board of Governors at Uxbridge College was proposing to close the nursery at the Hayes Campus of the college in Coldharbour Lane, Hayes. This is dreadful news. Many parents are anxious about the future for their children. I am also extremely concerned at the potential loss of this facility to the area. If we want parents to continue to study and to work we need more childcare places not less. Uxbridge College has played a fantastic role in our area in developing the really successful Hayes Campus and has put so much back into our community. I am hoping therefore that the college will think again. I have written to the college authorities asking them to reconsider their proposal to close the nursery. The college is undertaking a consultation at the moment. If, like me, you feel the nursery should be kept open, please do let the College know.

Housing Crisis is Hurting In Hayes and Harlington

2012-01-04T14:26:58Z

From what I am seeing in my advice surgeries and people contacting my office in Hayes, the housing crisis is really hurting local families as they struggle to keep a roof over their heads. The housing charity Shelter sent me the following information, which does reflect what is happening locally.

Shelter says “One million people have taken out a payday loan to help pay their rent or mortgage in the last 12 months, according to survey findings released by Shelter today. The astonishing results reveal the spiral of debt that people are falling into in order to keep a roof over their head. Shelter has a network of debt advice services across the country, which we encourage you to promote to your constituents. Our online advice is available at www.shelter.org.uk/debt and the free telephone helpline number is 0808 800 4444. The survey also reveals that almost seven million people are relying on credit in some form to help pay their housing costs; using payday loans, unauthorised overdrafts, other loans or credit cards. For many the New Year brings with it the risk of homelessness and we are urging anyone worried about their debts to make seeking early debt advice their New Year’s resolution.Please help us reach as many people at risk as we can by promoting our services in your surgeries and on your website.”

I advise anyone struggling to pay their rent or mortgage to contact Shelter’s helpline or the local Citizens Advice Bureau, which is in Hayes town centre.

Council Cuts £600,000 from Local Primary Schools to Give to Schools in North of Borough

2011-12-19T13:04:48Z

I have discovered that the Council is taking way away over half a million pounds from primary schools in the south of the borough to be redistributed largely to schools in the north of the borough. Under a new formula proposed by Hillingdon Council primary schools in the south of Hillingdon will suffer a net loss of £600,000 over the next three years. The schools serving the most deprived pupils will lose out whilst this money will be redistributed largely to schools in the north of the borough, serving the wealthiest areas. Yet again it is the south of the borough that is losing out at the expense of the wealthiest areas in the north of Hillingdon. To remove funds from the schools and children that need them the most is disgraceful. £600,000 is a lot of money and represents a lot of teachers jobs. It is just unfair that time and time again under this council the resources of the south of the borough are being plundered to benefit the north. Local people feel justifiably that we are being robbed.

Pensions Dispute Debate In Parliament

2011-12-11T15:45:55Z

Last week I intervened in the debate in the House of Commons on the Pensions Dispute. I urged the Government to let proper negotiations take place to settle this dispute and to stop provoking industrial action.

Opening Laurel Lane Schoool Library

2011-12-11T15:17:49Z

Last week I had the honour of opening the new library at Laurel Lane School in West Drayton. The library has been developed by the pupils themselves with the help of a volunteer retired librarian and their teachers. The children have designed the layout of the library, chosen many of the books, catalogued them and made labels for the bookshelves. Some of the children have become the school’s librarians and are organising the library on behalf of the other pupils. This is a marvelous school. The children are as bright as buttons and the whole atmosphere of the school is so warm, happy and inviting. This is all down to the total dedication of an inspirational headteacher, a highly committed and professional team of staff, backed up by a hard working set of governors. They all deserve our admiration and thanks.

Council Starts Attack on Lake Farm Country Park

2011-12-11T14:47:36Z

This week we discovered that Hillingdon Council had started test drilling on our local Lake Farm Country in preparation for building on this treasured green belt land. Hillingdon Council has given no notice of this work commencing and there has been no public consultation on the Council’s proposals for building a school covering over a third of the country park. Similarly no planning application has yet been published by the Council. There are a range of more suitable alternative sites for a new school but the Council has failed to consult on these options so far. Local Hayes Councillors and residents groups believe that what lies behind the Council’s plans is its aim to gain income from the sale of sites in the south of the borough for investment in the north of the borough. The Council’s intention seems to be to build on our country park and sell off the other available sites and use the capital receipts gained to pay for improvements in Ruislip and Uxbridge. I will be convening a further public meeting on this threat to our green belt early in the New Year to organise opposition to this attack on our open spaces. I fear that if the Council gets its way on building on this important part of our green belt no green belt site will be safe from development in our area.

Pensions Strike Today.

2011-11-30T17:12:45Z

I visited the picket lines in my constituency today to support my constituents, who were taking industrial action to protect their pensions. I called in at the picket lines of a number of local schools,Hillingdon hospital, Hayes Job Centre, Brunel University, Heathrow airport, Hillingdon Civic Centre and the Vehicle Testing Centre in Yeading.I also joined the staff of the House of Commons on their picket line and went on the march and rally in central London. Talking to people on the picket lines and demonstration it was clear that the issue for them was that they felt they had no other option but to strike because the Government was refusing to negotiate seriously to settle this dispute. All of the union members I met were angry that they were being asked to work longer, pay significantly increased contributions and get less in their pension. For them this was made even worse by the fact that the increased contributions weren’t going to pay for their pensions but straight to the Government Treasury to pay off the deficit caused by the economic crisis. The argument consistently put to me was why should teachers, nurses, council staff and civil servants have to pay for a crisis they didn’t cause? The bankers, speculators and all those rich corporations evading and avoiding their taxes should pay. I fully agree and support this industrial action 100%. It is obvious that the Government needs to start negotiating in earnest or there will innevitaby be more strikes.

Promoting Our Canal In Hayes

2011-11-30T16:41:08Z

For over 10 years now I have been campaigning for improvements to the canal area in Hayes town. My idea was to open up the canalside, encourage boating activity on the canal and to encourage British Waterways to allow both temporary and residential moorings along the canal in the own centre. I am also keen to open up Shackles Dock which is silted up at the moment. At long last despite numerous delays the Council has now opened up the views to the canal by replacing the wall alongside the towpath with railings. Last Sunday, Thames 21 experimented with a limited number of activities on the water, including boat trips in the floating classroom and canoeing. The project to build the Floating Classroom came from a meeting I convened some years ago of canal enthusiasts, such as Arthur Bennett, the manager of Willow Tree Marina. The local scouts facilitated the canoeing and although it was a cold, wet day it was a demonstration of what could be achieved in attracting people onto the canal. On the question of the residential moorings British Waterways have gained planning permission for the residential moorings but say they do not have sufficient funds to complete the project. We approached Hillingdon Community Trust but with no success. My next step is to see if there are any organisations that have an interest in canals that can help us fund the construction of these moorings. I am also looking to see if Shackles Dock could be dug out using volunteers with some expert advice and supervision. At least with the imminent completion of the Ballymore development we will have temporary moorings for overnight mooring. I established a local canal society some time ago so if there is anyone interested in joning us to help improve our local canal please contact me.