Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

BT and PO pension funds backed Gas 'fat cat' pay

Stephen Castle Political Editor
Saturday 03 June 1995 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

PENSION funds representing Post Office and British Telecom workers voted to save Cedric Brown, chief executive of British Gas, at last week's angry meeting of shareholders.

Managers of the miners' pension fund are also thought to have backed Mr Brown's 71 per cent pay increase. So are the fund managers for BBC employees and for workers at Associated Newspapers, publisher of the Daily Mail which has vigorously criticised Mr Brown's salary.

The revelations, made public by the Labour Party yesterday, coincide with new proposals by the Shadow Chancellor, Gordon Brown, to tackle the City's "block vote" by forcing pension funds to make their voting decisions more transparent.

He said: "Millions of pensioners will be horrified to learn that their funds have been used to support boardroom excess. The whole question of institutional shareholders voting needs radical reform with more openness and accountability."

Alan Johnson, general secretary of the Union of Communication Workers, said he would seek "an explanation from those who are elected to represent our interests". The decision was "surprising and disappointing".

Despite rowdy scenes and the opposition of most individual shareholders at last Wednesday's annual general meeting, the British Gas board won with the support of the big investors. Most pension funds backed the British Gas remuneration package, but they are under no obligation to admit how they voted.

Those known to have backed the British Gas board include Hermes, which manages the Post Office and BT pensions.

Others thought to have backed the board include CIN Management, which manages the former British Coal's pension fund, M&G Group, which manages the BBC fund, and MIM and Rothschilds, which manage the Associated Newspapers fund.

Additional investment funds which backed the board include Prudential, Standard Life and Mercury Asset Management. Those voting against included local authority funds, Scottish Amicable and Sainsbury's pensions fund. In an editorial last week, the Daily Mail argued: "It doesn't matter if the army of small shareholders in British Gas is united in disgust at the vast remuneration packages awarded to the likes of Cedric Brown. He and his fellow board members are protected because the big financial institutions are too timid to rock the boat."

None of the companies was prepared to confirm which way its pension fund voted. Most say that they are not consulted on the investment decisions.

But Labour's Economic Policy Commission is proposing measures to curtail the freedom of the pension funds and big companies to act in secrecy.

One paper, "Economic and Employment Opportunities for All", will argue for "disclosure of each director's pay package to shareholders", and an obligation on companies to seek approval before executives receive pay.

The second document, "A New Economic Future for Britain", will call for a "commitment to transparency" giving fund managers the "responsibility to justify the way they vote at AGMs". Labour also wants a code of conduct.

Business, page 16

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in