Forum Topic

Ann Keen plays on two sides?

From the ChiswickW4 Editorial,Ann Keen MP has attracted criticism from political opponents over what they see as her double standard on opposition to Heathrow. On October 10th, The Brentford and Isleworth MP voted against an amendment to the Civil Aviation Bill that would have retained limits on the number of night flights. Later in the month she appeared at a rally at Westminster and spoke against Heathrow expansion, urging constituents to send her letters on the issue. Nic Ferriday of West London Friends of the Earth accused the MP of 'staggering hypocrisy' saying, "She had the temerity to come to the rally and say that she supported residents on night flights, while voting in Parliament to allow an increase in the number of flights. At least the other MPs who voted for more night flights had the decency to stay away from the rally."Andrew Dakers, the Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Spokesperson for Brentford & Isleworth, has accused Ann Keen of failing to represent her constituents’ interests on night flights. In a letter to Mrs Keen, Dakers wrote, “On an issue as significant as night flights and airport expansion your regular excuse that as a Parliamentary Private Secretary you must always follow the government line is simply not good enough. This is a matter of such importance to the people of this constituency you must start prioritising our needs.”The proposed amendment would have left in place the original wording of the Civil Aviation Act of 1982 which limits the number of flights. The new act would allow the limit to be set by the total amount of noise. Opponents of the change argued that big increases in the number of flights could be achieved with a relatively small amount of noise.When asked about the night flights issue Ann Keen said she was pleased to be able to speak at the rally and added, "I cannot stress enough to the constituents of Brentford and Isleworth the need for them to make their voice known at this crucial time. I will continue to work with the London Borough of Hounslow and lobby Ministers to highlight the impact of the airport on our community and especially children’s health and education." Tom Beaton of Hounslow Green Party attended the rally at Westminster and said, "It was heartening to hear how many MPs say they support us in our campaign to banish the misery of night flights. But there is something very strange about Ann Keen appearing on this platform. She obviously wants to give the impression that she is on the same side as the majority of her constituents. " He praised local Labour Councillor Ruth Cadbury saying that her speech was effective in demolishing the economic arguments for expansion at Heathrow.Andrew Slaughter, MP for Ealing, Acton and Shepherd's Bush also voted against the amendment. He did not respond to our request for a comment.

Paul Fisher ● 7209d28 Comments

'Is Sarah not aware of this ...'Is this po-litical speak? ... maybe somebody should ask her ... ...?    ;-)

Sarah Felstead ● 7203d

I have been leading Hounslow Council's Campaign against expansion at Heathrow for three years now - against: Runway 3, more night flights, the loss of Runway Alternation, and in favbour of proper noise insulation schemes.  Is Sarah not aware of this (we get enough coverage in hm, the local papers etc) or is she saying we're not doing enough?  For details see our website - www.hounslow.gov.uk.  For starters, we are lobbying MPs and (tomorrow) the House of Lords, on the Civil Aviation Bill.  Clause 2.2 of this allows the extra 2 flights per night and we are promoting the amendment to get it deleted.  Sleep disturbance studies show that once you wake, it is difficult to return to full sleep again, even if the subsequent plane is quiet ie it doesn't matter how quiet or noisy the plane is.  As a result of our campaigning work we got a recognition of the needs of residents acknowledged in the 2003 Aviation White Paper,  - a first for the Department of Transport I think.  We also got the Community Buildings Noise insulation scheme - £5m pa for at least 5 years, to double glaze our schools and community buildings - not nearly enough but a start.  I'm also hoping that we will influence the DfT's work on air quality - which will be the crux issue as to whether Runway 3 can go ahead.Our next big fight will be on runway alternation - look out for the DfT public consultation next year which could propose the end of this vestige of peace we get either before or after 3pm.However, a Council campaign is more effective when actively supported by the community.  We are also working with HACAN Clearskies - who now have a Hounslow branch - if you aren't already a member do join.  And I spoke (as did Ann Keen) at the Night Flights Rally held last Monday in Westminster.Hoping that's a start to Sarah's remark!Cllr Ruth Cadbury

Ruth Cadbury ● 7203d

Who's that then?

Sarah Felstead ● 7204d

"Is it not a fact that nobody represents us over the planes, then? "No effectively, no.

Dan Evans ● 7204d

Is it not a fact that nobody represents us over the planes, then?

Sarah Felstead ● 7204d

"I am ignoring the subject of planes as I really don’t think anyone represents us in this issue."I'd tend to agree but well done to Neil for introducing a fact to the discussion. If the new planes are quieter then there must a case for incentivising the airlines to introduce them on the Far East routes quickly. If this means more flights then the key point is whether or not the quieter planes are a sufficient trade off for having more of them. The concern must be that we don't seem to have people with enough knowledge of this issue to exercise proper scrutiny of the way the rules are interpreted.

Dan Evans ● 7204d

Its amazing what we mere mortals can discover about our MP`s perks and expenses these days isnt it?Who knows,perhaps Alan Keen will explain all as he promised to do so on the General Election evening.Still in his defence it was only 5-6 months ago!!I wonder if he will be off to the World Cup next year on an all expenses paid freebie as he did in the Portugal 2004 Euro Championship?

Paul Fisher ● 7204d

Andrew;No doubt you saw the additional revelation in The Times on Friday/Saturday page 2, that most MP's also receive £400 per month for food and groceries..without any need for receipts etc.That £400 per month is greater than the £340 state pension I get each month after 48 years of contributions. So you can add another £10,000 to the total that the Keen family probably receive each year. (plus that 2 lots of £20,000).The article also mentioned that they are probably entitled to a free TV licence for the 2nd home..(do they claim twice?)Maybe Mrs Keen doesn't like facing men!  Most recent photos I've seen of Mrs Keen finds her amongst a group of happy ladies. Does she mix with the locals at all?Three noisy aircraft have just gone over ..the first at 4.40am! Its a con!!Did you read about the top BAA executives who have some connection with Kew gardens...that location right under the flight path. Something shifty going on there. Dosh and favours to Kew Gardens apparently so that they won't complain about the aircraft noise  (5.01am another noisy one going over!). Even some of Kew Gardens scientists get freebie flights to distance parts of the world to do their research..in return for .."don't complain about the noise"VIP's go to Kew in the afternoons only apparently...when the racket is less annoying.Doesn't Mr Alan Keen represent an all-Party Group of MP's in dealings with Heathrow, the airlines,and the Unions and others there. Wonder where he stands on these matters. (5.07am another semi-screaming jet has gone over..who are they kidding!!)Mrs Keen apparently wants more local residents to join the campaign against an extension to night flights. How does she get her message out and across. Via this Forum? Via her website? Who knows. (5.09am an extra noisy one just arriving overhead!!). Maybe there's a letter in the post?

Jim Lawes ● 7204d

You're right Phil, £41 does seem a bit cheap to stay in inner London. After all the Keens have been claiming about £45 each, every single day since June 2001. It must be hard work being an MP in the London Borough of Hounslow as you never seem to get a day off and a holiday also seems out of the question.Anyway back to Vince Cable. What a rip off merchant!!

Andrew Sibley ● 7205d

Out of interest, where in Inner London can one stay the night for £41?  Could it be that for this small consideration he spent a night on the Keens' settee?

Phil Andrews ● 7205d

I now have the figures that I have been so keen to get my hands on and it is staggering what you can claim for as an MP. The most interesting column is the Additional Costs Allowance which is for "necessary costs incurred when staying overnight away from their main home for the purpose of performing parliamentary duties. Inner London Members do not receive this allowance."From June 2001 to March 2005 Ann and Alan Keen have claimed £130,288.00 between them for this allowance alone. Not bad considering their main home is in Brentford, just nine miles from Westminster. In the interests of fairness I thought I should compare the same allowance of an MP who's main home is a similar distance from Westminster as the Keen's. So I looked at Vincent Cable, MP for Twickenham. For the same period and the same allowance he has claimed £41.00. Shame on you Vince for ripping off the tax payers of Twickenham!!

Andrew Sibley ● 7205d

See, I told you I missed completely obvious. I did get as far as the Houses of Parliament web site but unknown to me MP's expenses are refered to as Members Allowances. Thank you anyway and I'll try not to be so stupid next time.

Andrew Sibley ● 7205d

"I spent over two hours the other day trying to find out any information on MP's expenses but no success. Maybe I missed something completely obvious"Like typing 'MPs expenses' into Google perhaps - which eventually brings you to this link. http://www.parliament.uk/site_information/allowances.cfm

Andy Jones ● 7205d

Are MP's expenses published each year and if so where can one obtain these figures?The article in this week's Evening Standard listed expenses claimed by all of London's MP's but the story was more to do with how much they spend on postage. Ann and Alan Keen were not singled out for anything (I can't imagine Ann's postage bill being too high as she never seems to reply to anyone's letters) but between them they claimed over £220,000 last year. I presume this is what it costs for them to run their offices and does not include expenses for a second home as this is a seperate thing.I spent over two hours the other day trying to find out any information on MP's expenses but no success. Maybe I missed something completely obvious but I could not find any information that gave a breakdown of exactly what MP's claim and what it was for. They tell you that they are transparrent when it comes to this sort of thing but just try getting the figures.

Andrew Sibley ● 7205d

No, the subject of MP’s expenses has not been done to death as there are not reasonable answers for us to hear or they are not presented in a manner in which they can be fairly considered by all involved - which includes the (darn) voters.I find this issue another strange one.  I think that we are all pleased that transparency allows us to see what is going on.  It should also show the MP’s what is going on.  Real transparency would allow considered debate and review of these allowances, instead it provokes negative feelings and therefore completely lets down the people it is paid to.What is the point of transparency if it is not to weigh these allowances up and make any changes which may be required to pay them fairly and reasonably?  I find myself wondering whether they are allowances at all, or indeed a perk - perks in all other walks of life are taxable!By not addressing the issues so they can be ironed out and we can all move on, they allow MP’s to have pot shots taken at them.  At the other end of the scale I do not understand whether we should be grateful to MP’s who don’t claim anything or wonder at where they source their income from? The pot shots should be aimed at the people who are in charge of over viewing the allowance system.  Another year on and not much has changed!… … … I am ignoring the subject of planes as I really don’t think anyone represents us in this issue.

Sarah Felstead ● 7206d

"We're in the dark..relying on newspaper reports"And then their strategy is to bully the newspapers into silence, as well as using their mouthpieces on forums such as this to try to create an artificial groundswell of objection whenever details of their activities threaten to see light of day.You really have to study the whole picture very thoroughly indeed before being able to appreciate fully the magnitude of the deceit, the cynicism and the mocking contempt which these people and some of their supporters have for the people who elect them to positions of power.Why do I now sense either a "you're trying to score political points" or a "this has been done to death, let's change the subject" posting heading in my direction?

Phil Andrews ● 7206d

""her opposition to the amendment may have served the greater good by allowing her to continue to enjoy the ear of those who hold the reins of power within central government"" There's something amiss with this dual couple who represent the whole of the London Borough of Hounslow. Whether it was their involvement with the Gate Gourmet Unions and employees (spanish customs ahoy!)(she should have been tackling them not supporting them), their double claim for MP's allowances for their nine miles away London Flat..or their failure at attend hustings at a local School..or within the Constituency...or the poor quality of some of the information on their website. Now we have this failure to support the amendment to contain night flights. We should be banning all those aircraft arrivals between 5am and 6am...not offering an all-night any -time policy.  I'm often still working at 5am some mornings and the air traffic in that one hour is most annoying and is offensive. (Arrivals in Melbourne are banned till 6am..why not London too).  Mrs Keen decision is disgaceful..and I hope she gets booed at her next local appearance.On Mrs Keen's website she tries to explain how her pay is made up. Unless I'm mistaken Mr Keen's entry has been inserted instead!!!!""Most people accept that democracy costs money and it certainly needs to be open and transparent to constituents and members of the public. However, not many people know what their representatives do and how much they receive for their work. As MP for Feltham and Heston which covers an area including Bedfont, Feltham, Hounslow West, Heston, Hanworth and Cranford, I receive allowances, including the additional costs allowance, to help me carry out my work in addition to my salary of £57,485. I hope the following information will clearly explain what the taxpayers pay for""  (Sounds like Mr Keen's details on the wrong website!!)There doesn't seem to be any explaination about the Inner London Allowance of about £20,000 which they both claim on the Covent Garden flat. We're in the dark..relying on newspaper reports. Mr Keen promised to explain everything to us ..(at the last Election Count)There's something not quite right...and their activities have been highlighted in the Evening Standard again tonight.Why don't they respond?

Jim Lawes ● 7206d

The new super Airbus is quieter than aircraft currently running the Australian and South-East Asian routes. These are the planes that come in from approx 4.30am. The first planes usually come from Hong Kong then Singapore etc.The new Airbus will replace the Singapore Airlines 747 400 series so although it lands anytime from 5.15 it should be quieter.Because a number of airlines will be operating the new Airbus and super Jumbos I dont see why the have to increase night flights.

Neil Chippendale ● 7206d

PhilStill absolutely no attempt to address the issue. In fact nobody seems interested in any of the underlying facts. It may be that limiting the number of flights by noise is a backdoor way for the airlines to get more planes in or it may be that this give the Secretary of State more flexibility to tackle the issue.A new generation of super jumbos is about to come into operation therefore perhaps this change in the rule is a sensible precaution. If you simply were to limit the number of night flights the airlines will put their biggest and probably noisiest planes on the route to ensure they have enough capacity.

Dan Evans ● 7208d

DanThe article which Paul has brought to our attention was a direct lift from the news columns of the forum at Chiswick W4.  Paul did not invent the article, or the comments which it attributed to various local political figures from the Liberal Democrats and the Green Party.I am neither a Liberal Democrat nor a member of the Green Party, but I have met all of the people quoted and can state quite categorically that these are not people who "queue up to score points".  They are decent local activists with a sincere interest in improving our environment and our local community's quality of life, and even as an "opponent" I have no problems acknowledging this.Matt, who is quite open about his New Labour allegiance, has attempted to defend Mrs. Keen's conduct by suggesting that her opposition to the amendment may have served the greater good by allowing her to continue to enjoy the ear of those who hold the reins of power within central government.  Whilst I don't buy this argument, and was a bit flippant towards him with my response, it is at least clear to everyone concerned where he is coming from.If your protests are well-founded and Mrs. Keen's  good, honourable intentions have been misunderstood (again!) then I am surprised that Matt opted for the defence he did.  Do you believe you know something he doesn't?

Phil Andrews ● 7208d

There seems to be little in the way of fact in this article and it consists only of political denunciations. The claim is made that Ann Keen's support of a change of policy is inconsistent with her opposition to Heathrow expansion. It occurs to me that it is actually quite sensible to allow airlines to have more flights if at the same time you are making it conditional on planes being quieter. Would I be wrong in assuming that everyone who is queueing up to score points on this issue has not spent anytime whatsoever examining the alternative point of view or considered the possibility that it may deliver less aircraft noise around Heathrow?

Dan Evans ● 7209d

I suppose the two are related in that being in a Party means that you have to cede that your colleague's call on limited resources is greater than your own. It seems to me that we all want the best public services and the best public facilities and we all - understandably - want them on our doorstep. The hard part is dividing the cake so everybody's happy.

Matt Harmer ● 7209d

Some very good points Matt but it still all points to our MP putting her own career in front of her constituents wishes.I can see why she not state clearly before the last General Election that she would always vote in the Commons depending on how she was told to as she would have potentially lost her seat, but morally this is totally wrong in my eyes.

Paul Fisher ● 7209d

MattThank you for explaining this.Presumably a similarly cunning plan was involved when councillors from the ruling Labour Group who wanted to keep John Aird House open voted for its closure.  Could you please elaborate on this for us?

Phil Andrews ● 7209d

For a minute there I thought you'd really hit on a scoop.I think it's about deciding how she can do most good. She can vote against the government, lose the PPS job and remain on the back benches or vote with the govt and still have the ear of the Chancellor. In terms of influence I'd go with the latter - though I would say that, wouldn't I.I'm glad there's acknowledgement about Cllr Ruth Cadbury's work on demolishing the view that Heathrow and London's economy will suffer if expansion is not allowed. Whether we like it or not (and I don't) it's the money that talks loudest in these decisions and we need to prove that our economy is not so fragile that forcing a few people to change at Gatwick or Charles De Gaulle will plunge us into penury.

Matt Harmer ● 7209d

No doubt she will tell us that she is against a third runway at Heathrow but as soon as Tony says "jump" she'll be voting for it. If she is duty bound to toe the party line in her capacity as a Parliamentary Private Secretary how can she be in a position to represent her constituents on issues such as increased night flights. Perhaps we should all write to her and urge her to vote against any bill that would increase night flights and see what she does. If she votes in favour then she should consider doing the honorable thing and resign her current position, just like Robin Cook did when he disagreed with the Prime Minister over Iraq.

Andrew Sibley ● 7209d

I found this article from 2003 in which Ann Keen states her "concern" about our childrens education suffering because of aircraft noise.Perhaps its ok in her eyes for them to be kept awake at night in the future?    Search the site:        Can you hear us BAA?by Andrew RaineTHE DAMAGING EFFECT on Hounslow schoolchildren of a third runway at Heathrow was highlighted by Brentford & Isleworth's MP Ann Keen this week, who also revealed she will be joining a march against the proposed extension this weekend.The MP visited Lampton school on Lampton Avenue on Wednesday (June 4th) to meet pupils, staff and governors from other local schools to discuss the problems they suffer from aircraft noise. Concerns were raised that children's lessons were being drowned out by low flying aircraft making their approach to Heathrow, and standards could fall for those trying to revise and sit their GCSEs and A levels through the noise.Ann Keen commented: ''I am all too aware of the difficulties that many of our local schools face from aircraft noise. At this time of year when so many children are doing exams and revising the impact of such noise pollution is intensified. The education of our children is too important it should not be allowed to be damaged by flight path noise.''My fear is that a third runway would make this problem even worse and spread the problem to other parts of the borough. This is another vitally important reason against a third runway at Heathrow.''

Paul Fisher ● 7209d

These people are truly unbelievable, aren't they?Anybody who votes New Labour at next year's local elections on the back of promises made should bear this story in mind.  They will promise one thing and unashamedly vote for the opposite without the slightest twinge of conscience or even understanding of what they have done wrong.  John Aird House springs to mind.Let's hope the local press have the courage to cover this and do not allow themselves to be cowed by Ann Keen's recent attempts to stifle any discussion of her record by resort to legal threats.  That she was able to make such threats and be capable of backing them up with hard cash is, of course, due in no small part to the scandalaous way in which she has exploited loopholes in the laws relating to member expenses.What wonderful, ethical people we have representing us locally in government.  Roll on next May.

Phil Andrews ● 7209d