Ross Goobey attacks pension fund trustees who fail to vote
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.Alastair Ross Goobey of Hermes, one of the City's top pension fund managers, yesterday attacked pension fund trustees who fail to vote at annual meetings.
He suggested they should be forced to lodge proxies declaring their intention to abstain, whenever they decide not to vote.
He also revealed that he had been approached by someone who had offered to pay Hermes to cast its vote in their interest at an agm, though he had refused the request.
Mr Ross Goobey said: "Whether or not this is legal or ethical, we did not agree, but it does demonstrate the value of a vote."
Mr Ross Goobey did not go as far as insisting on mandatory voting at annual meetings, a policy fiercely opposed by the National Association of Pension Funds which was hosting the London conference where he spoke.
But he said: "I am more hawkish than my colleagues and believe that we should press for compulsory lodging of proxies." He believed that trustees were not acting in a proper fiduciary fashion if they failed to use their proxies.
If trustees were obliged to lodge them at company meetings "it would force them as fiduciaries to develop a coherent voting policy".
The NAPF argued in its opposition to mandatory voting that a compulsory vote was a thoughtless vote, and that it would also be anti-democratic not to allow for abstentions.
Mr Ross Goobey said: "I am not in favour of making voting compulsory. I agree that an abstention is a valid option, but this should be done deliberately, and a proxy card with abstain written on it would fulfil my ambitions."
He added that last month PDFM noted, in its 1996 survey of investment arrangements for pension funds, that ''there was a sharp increase - from 17 to 28 per cent of respondents - who claim to 'always vote' at UK company meetings''.
Subscribe to Independent Premium to bookmark this article
Want to bookmark your favourite articles and stories to read or reference later? Start your Independent Premium subscription today.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments