The Labour government has ordered the closure of a public register that for eight years has tracked shareholder rebellions against UK-listed companies, a move critics say will allow firms to bury controversies over excessive executive pay.
The End of a Transparency Tool
The public register was launched in 2017 under then-Prime Minister Theresa May's Conservative government. Its purpose was to name and shame companies that faced significant shareholder revolts at their annual general meetings (AGMs), particularly over issues like outsized bonuses and salary hikes for top bosses.
However, the Treasury, led by Chancellor Rachel Reeves, has now instructed the Investment Association (IA) – the asset management trade body that maintained the register – to shut it down. This forms part of a broader regulatory action plan aimed at boosting economic growth by cutting perceived red tape for businesses.
City Lobbying and Competitive Fears
The closure follows a lobbying campaign by companies, including the London Stock Exchange. Their argument is that negative publicity surrounding executive pay is damaging the City of London's competitiveness and deterring companies from listing in the UK.
This decision marks a significant cultural shift from the register's inception, which was intended to restore public confidence in big business. Yousif Ebeed, corporate governance lead at Schroders, noted its initial impact: "It definitely had a role in holding companies to account in the early years, especially on remuneration... The register helped shine a light on these companies."
Warnings from Transparency Advocates
The thinktank High Pay Centre has issued a stark warning about the consequences. Researcher Paddy Goffey stated the move will harm transparency and make it easier for FTSE All-Share companies to dismiss investor concerns, starting from the 2026 AGM season.
"This would make it more likely that significant cases of shareholder dissent on issues of pay, governance and wider strategy will go unnoticed," Goffey said. The centre points out that 26% of FTSE 100 companies have experienced a shareholder rebellion on executive pay in the past three years, where dissent is defined as 20% or more votes against a resolution.
While acknowledging that corporate reporting can be burdensome, the thinktank argues that streamlining should not involve discontinuing valuable tools. Instead, it suggests companies should be forced to give more detailed explanations for dissent and their planned responses.
"Ultimately, discontinuing the register will make it much harder and more time-consuming to gather the relevant data and information, as such data could be 'buried' in complex filings," the High Pay Centre added. This change, coupled with a shift to online-only AGMs, forms part of what they see as worrying trends in corporate transparency.
Government and Industry Response
The UK Treasury, which ordered the closure in October, stated it was "grateful to the IA for establishing the register" but believes it has served its purpose. It contends that the existing corporate governance code already provides sufficient transparency for investors.
Some institutional investors like Schroders' Ebeed believe large investors will remain "unaffected." However, a major concern is the impact on smaller, retail investors – a group the government is actively encouraging to buy UK shares. The reduction in easily accessible data could impair their ability to make informed decisions and hold boards accountable.
The decision arrives amid broader fears that the UK is losing investment to the United States, where deregulation is a key policy. Critics of the register's closure fear it lowers the barrier for corporate accountability and may lead companies to take shareholder dissent less seriously in the future.
