INVESTMENT
ShellMNDelections revive debateover climatechange
By Jem Bartholomew
As the Shell Contributory Pension Fund announces elections for member-nominated trustees, debate has reignited over whether elections or selection processes deliver the best outcomes for members
T
he Shell Contributory Pension Fund announced elections for member- nominated trustees in July, with campaigners calling on members to seize the opportunity and appoint
climate risk-conscious representatives. Shell’s electoral process is “inherently limiting”, campaigners say, as candidates are vetted by a panel of existing trustees before the member vote. Elections for two trustee directors out of an eight-
person board will begin on October 11 – after the panel has selected eight appropriate candidates to stand – with incumbents sitting for four years and helping to plot the fund’s investment strategy. “It feels like this is an opportunity to get
someone who is really on the ball with [responsible investment] and willing to get really involved,” says Lauren Peacock, campaign manager at ShareAction. But concerns have been raised over the process
of selecting electoral candidates. “The problem is invariably in any selection process, I’mafraid, we are prejudiced. We have a tendency to bring forward like-thinking and like-minded people,”
says Stephen Fallowell, a former RBS trustee and current Association of Member Nominated Trustees committee member. He continues: “I’malways a bit suspicious of
people who say it’s an ‘objective’ process when there are individuals involved who, by their very nature – and I include myself in that – have prejudices and are subjective in the way they select.”
Legal dispute rumbles on The fresh elections arrive during the ongoing legal dispute between SCPF and Christoph Harwood, a former Shell employee in the 1980s and 1990s and nowa partner and investment adviser at Marksman Consulting, which advises clients on transitioning to a low-carbon economy. Mr Harwood stood to become a trustee in 2015,
on a platform of his expertise in measuring climate risk, but was not chosen by the panel to go forward to the member vote. After lobbying SCPF to release its climate risk decision-making last year, which it refused, Mr Harwood filed a case with the Pensions Ombudsman. “I applied to be a trustee of the SCPF in 2015,
recognising the global shift to a lower-carbon economy as one of the key financial issues being faced by the scheme both in relation to the sponsor’s strength and portfolio management. I felt I could bring experience to the trustee board in this regard,” he tells Pensions Expert. Mr Harwood continues: “The failure of my application and continued concern that the SCPF was not appropriately considering climate change-
Where the UK’s pension giants stand on climate change
Shell fund told the Environmental Audit Committee it was considering signing up to the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures, and was labelled ‘engaged’
TCFD reporting
No plans to report
28% 40%
Committed to reporting
Less engaged 16% 44% 40% 32% Considering Source: Environmental Audit Committee Engaged More or less engaged? More engaged
into account Lauren Peacock, ShareAction
A good pension scheme is one that not only invests responsibly, but also listens to members and takes their views
26
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48
