Pension Scheme Statement of Investment Principles

This is the Statement of Investment Principles (the “Statement”) made by the Trustees of the Aston University Pension Scheme (“the Scheme”) in accordance with the Pensions Act 1995 (as amended). The Statement is subject to periodic review at least every three years and without delay after any significant change in investment policy.

In preparing this Statement, the Trustees have consulted with the Aston University (“the Sponsor”) and has taken and considered written advice from the Investment Practice of Hymans Robertson LLP.

The Scheme is a defined benefit scheme which is closed to further accruals and new members.

The Trustees are aware of the Myners Code of Conduct for Investment Decision Making and has reviewed its responsibilities and activities in the context of the Code.

The Trustees are supportive of the UK Stewardship Code which seeks to improve the quality of engagement between institutional investors and investee companies. Where appropriate, the Trustees expect investment managers to comply with the code and to produce a statement of their commitment to the code.

Scheme objective

The primary objective of the Scheme is to provide pension and lump sum benefits for members on their retirement and/or benefits on death, before or after retirement, for their dependants, on a defined benefits basis. The Trustees’ over-riding funding principles for the Scheme are to set the employer contribution at a level which is sufficient:

to build up assets to meet the cost of benefits already built up in respect of past service;
to recover any shortfall in assets relative to the value placed on accrued liabilities over the longer term; and
to ensure that there are always sufficient assets of the Scheme (at their realisable value) to meet 100% of benefits as they fall due for payment to members.

The value of liabilities is calculated on the basis agreed by the Trustees and the Scheme Actuary. The funding position is monitored regularly by the Trustees and formally reviewed at each triennial actuarial valuation, or more frequently as required by the Pensions Act 2004.

Investment strategy

The Trustees have translated their objectives into a suitable strategic (asset allocation) benchmark for the Scheme. The strategic benchmark is consistent with the Trustees’ view on the appropriate balance between seeking an enhanced long-term return on investments and accepting greater short-term volatility and risk.

The strategic benchmark is reflected in the benchmarks given to individual investment managers which, in aggregate, are consistent with the overall strategy.

The investment strategy takes account of the maturity profile of the Scheme (in terms of the relative proportions of liabilities in respect of pensioners, deferred and active members), together with the level of disclosed surplus or deficit (relative to the funding bases used) and the Trustees’ view of the covenant of the Sponsor.

The Trustees monitors strategy relative to their agreed asset allocation benchmark. It is intended that investment strategy will be reviewed at least every three years following actuarial valuations of the Scheme and will normally be reviewed annually. Written advice is received as required from professional advisers.

The Trustees monitor the performance of Scheme investments relative to agreed criteria on a regular basis.

The Trustees have delegated all day-to-day investment decisions to authorised investment managers.

AUPS Implementation Statement

230331 Aston - Implementation Statement_1.pdf182.46 KB

Choosing investments

The Trustees have appointed three investment managers to manage Scheme investments. All three investment managers are authorised under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 to undertake investment business. The Trustees, after taking appropriate advice, have given the investment managers specific guidelines including, but not limited to, asset allocation and geographic spread, on how investment mandates are to be managed. The investment managers are allowed some flexibility of choice subject to their benchmarks and other guidelines and are expected to maintain diversified portfolios.

The Trustees have also decided to invest in a number of individual pooled funds. The Trustees are satisfied that the pooled funds selected are consistent with the objectives of the Scheme, particularly in relation to diversification, risk, expected return and liquidity.

The Trustees have appointed each of the Scheme’s investment managers to deliver a specific benchmark or performance target, which overall will align to deliver the broader Scheme investment strategy. The Trustees ensure that all manager engagements have clearly defined benchmarks, objectives and management parameters.

Remuneration for each mandate is determined at the inception of each mandate based on commercial considerations and typically set on an ad valorem basis The Trustees periodically review the fees paid to the Scheme’s managers against industry standards.

The Trustees review the nature of Scheme investments on a regular basis, with particular reference to suitability and diversification. The Trustees seek and consider written advice from a suitably qualified person when determining the appropriateness of each manager and mandate for the Scheme, particularly in relation to diversification, risk, expected return and liquidity. If, at any time, investment in a security or product not previously known to the Trustees is proposed, appropriate advice is sought and considered to ensure its suitability and diversification.

The Trustees recognise the long-term nature of the Scheme’s liability profile and appoints managers to invest in such a way that generates long term sustainable returns. The Trustees will carry out necessary due diligence on the underlying investment decision making process, to ensure the manager makes investment decisions over an appropriate time horizon aligned with the Scheme’s objective.

The duration of each mandate is determined by the Trustees at the inception of each mandate. For open-ended investments, the Trustees generally engage managers on an ongoing basis with no pre-determined term of appointment. For such mandates, the Trustees expect the minimum duration of the appointment will be three years. This being the period over which performance of the mandate can be appropriately evaluated, although all mandates are subject to ongoing review against various financial and non-financial metrics in addition to their continued appropriateness within the investment strategy.

The Trustees undertake a periodic service provider review in which the ongoing appropriateness of the Scheme’s manager arrangements are considered. The Trustees review the performance of each of the Scheme’s managers and mandates on a regular basis against a series of metrics, including financial performance against the benchmark and objectives of the mandate, the exercise of stewardship responsibilities (including engagement with issuers) as set out in greater detail below, and the management of risks. Material deviation from performance or risk targets is likely to result in the mandate being formally reviewed.

The Trustees monitor the managers’ performance against their respective benchmarks or targets on a regular basis over a long-term time horizon. Managers are expected to provide explanation for any significant deviations away from benchmarks or targets.

Kinds of investment to be held

The Scheme may invest in quoted and unquoted securities of UK and overseas markets including equities, fixed interest and index-linked bonds, cash, property, leveraged and non-leveraged gilt funds either directly or through pooled funds.

The Scheme may also make use of contracts of insurance, derivatives and contracts for difference (or in pooled funds investing in these products) for the purpose of efficient portfolio management or to hedge specific risks. The Trustees consider all of these classes of investment to be suitable in the circumstances of the Scheme.

Balance between different kinds of investments

The Scheme’s investment managers will hold a mix of investments which reflects their views relative to their respective benchmarks or return targets. Within each major market each manager will maintain a diversified portfolio of stocks.

Risk

The Scheme is exposed to a number of risks which pose a threat to the Scheme meeting its objectives. The principal risks affecting the Scheme are:

Funding risks

Financial mismatch – The risk that Scheme assets fail to grow in line with the developing cost of meeting the liabilities.
Changing demographics –The risk that longevity improves and other demographic factors change, increasing the cost of the Scheme benefits.
Systemic risk - The possibility of an interlinked and simultaneous failure of several asset classes and/or investment managers, possibly compounded by financial ‘contagion’, resulting in an increase in the cost of meeting the Scheme’s liabilities. Climate change is a particular systemic risk that has the potential to cause economic, financial and demographic impacts.

The Trustees measure and manage financial mismatch in two ways. As indicated above, the Trustees have set a strategic asset allocation benchmark for the Scheme. The Trustees assess risk relative to that benchmark by monitoring the Scheme’s asset allocation and investment returns relative to the benchmark. The Trustees also assess risk relative to liabilities by monitoring the delivery of returns relative to liabilities.

The Trustees keep mortality and other demographic assumptions, which could influence the cost of benefits, under review. These assumptions are considered formally at triennial valuations and the Trustees may enter into insurance contracts (bulk annuities or longevity swaps) to reduce these demographic risks.

The Trustees seek to mitigate systemic risks through a diversified portfolio, but it is not possible to make specific provision for all possible eventualities that may arise under this heading.

Asset risks

Concentration - The risk that a significant allocation to any single asset category and its underperformance relative to expectation would result in difficulties in achieving funding objectives.
Illiquidity – The risk that the Scheme cannot meet its immediate liabilities because it has insufficient liquid assets.
Currency risk – The risk that the currency of the Scheme’s assets underperforms relative to Sterling (i.e. the currency of the liabilities).
Manager underperformance - The failure by the fund managers to achieve the rate of investment return assumed in setting their mandates.
Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) risks – the extent to which ESG issues are not reflected in asset prices and/or not considered in investment decision making leading to underperformance relative to expectations. • Climate risk - The extent to which climate change causes a material deterioration in asset values as a consequence of factors including but not limited to policy change, physical impacts and the expected transition to a low-carbon economy.

The Trustees manage asset risks as follows. The Trustees provide a practical constraint on Scheme investments deviating greatly from the intended approach by investing in a range of investment mandates each of which has a defined objective, performance benchmark and manager process which, taken in aggregate, constrain risk within their expected parameters.

By investing across a range of assets, including quoted equities, bonds (and possibly in the future bulk annuity policies), the Trustees recognise the need to access funds in the short term to pay benefits. The risk of manager underperformance is mitigated by the inclusion of passive investment mandates within the investment portfolio.

In appointing three investment managers, the Trustees have considered the risk of underperformance by any single investment manager.

The Trustees do not expect managers to take excess short-term risk and will regularly monitor the managers’ performance against the benchmarks and objectives set on a short, medium and long terms basis.

The Trustees’ approach to the consideration of ESG risks and climate risk is set out in further detail below.

Other provider risk

Transition risk - The risk of incurring unexpected costs in relation to the transition of assets among managers.
Custody risk - The risk of loss of Scheme assets when held in custody or when being traded.
Credit default - The possibility of default of a counterparty in meeting its obligations.
Operational risk – The risk of loss as a result of fraud, cyber-attacks, poor advice, acts of negligence or lack of suitable process.
Legislative risk – The risk that managers of the Scheme fail to comply with changes to legislation.

The Trustees monitor and manage risks in these areas through a process of regular scrutiny of its providers, and audit of the operations it conducts for the Scheme by the appointed investment managers as appropriate (e.g. custody risk in relation to pooled funds). When carrying out significant transitions, the Trustees seek professional advice.

Expected return on investments

The investment strategy aims to achieve a return on Scheme assets, which taken in conjunction with contributions is sufficient over time to match growth in the Scheme’s pension liabilities.

Realisation of investments

The majority of the Scheme’s investments may be realised quickly if required. Property, which represents approximately 7.5% of total Scheme assets at the date of writing, may be difficult to realise quickly in certain circumstances.

Portfolio turnover

The Trustees have expectations of the level of turnover within each mandate which is determined at the inception of the mandate, based on the Trustees’ knowledge of the manager, investment process and the nature of the portfolio. Whilst the Trustees expect performance to be delivered net of costs, including the costs of trading within the portfolio, the Trustees expect managers to report on at least an annual basis on the underlying assets held within the portfolio and details of any transactions over the period.

The Trustees will challenge the Scheme’s managers if there is a sudden change in portfolio turnover or if the level of turnover seems excessive. The Trustees will request turnover costs incurred by the asset manager over the Scheme reporting year.

Consideration of financially material factors in investment arrangements

The Trustees recognises that the consideration of financially material factors, including ESG factors, is relevant at different stages of the investment process. The strategic benchmark has been determined using appropriate economic and financial assumptions from which expected risk/return profiles for different asset classes have been derived. These assumptions apply at a broad market level and are considered to implicitly reflect all financially material factors other than climate change.

The Trustees are targeting sustainable returns over the longer term by encouraging the managers to implement views which extend over the duration of the liabilities.

The Trustee expects its investment manager to take all financially material factors into account where relevant and the terms of the mandate permit.

In passive mandates, the Trustee recognises that the choice of benchmark dictates the assets held by the investment manager and that the manager has minimal discretion to take account of factors that may be deemed to be financially material. The Trustee accepts that the role of the passive manager is to deliver returns in line with the market and believe this approach is in line with the basis on which their current strategy has been set.
In active mandates, the Trustee recognises that the manager has freedom to exercise discretion as to the choice of assets held. The Trustee expects the manager to take into account all financially material factors in the selection of assets within their portfolios and to be able to demonstrate their approach when challenged.

Given the inherent uncertainty associated with climate change and relatively short investment horizon of the Scheme, the Trustee has not sought to explicitly consider the risks of climate change in setting its strategic benchmark or implementing its strategy. However, the Trustee periodically discusses climate change with its investment adviser and investment managers to consider the potential implications for the Scheme’s investments. More broadly, ESG factors are considered as follows:

The Trustees acknowledge the financial risks of climate change and the expected transition to a low carbon economy and they encourage their managers to implement views which takes these risks into account.
Given the discretion delegated to the active investment managers, the Trustees expect that their investment managers will take account of all financially material factors including the potential impact of ESG factors on their mandates.
The Trustees have discussed the extent to which ESG issues, where relevant to the investment mandate, are integrated into the investment processes of their investment managers

The Trustees will review the index benchmarks employed for the Scheme on at least a triennial basis.

In selecting new investment managers, reviewing strategies or appropriate indices, the Trustees explicitly consider potential managers’ approaches to responsible investment and the extent to which they integrate ESG issues in the investment process as a factor in their decision making.

The Trustees are satisfied that the investment managers are following an approach which takes account of all financially material factors.

Consideration of non-financially material factors in investment arrangements

Given the objectives of the Scheme, the Trustees do not impose any restrictions or exclusions to the investment arrangements based on non-financially material factors.

Stewardship and monitoring

The Trustee recognises that stewardship encompasses the exercise of voting rights, engagement by and with investment managers and the monitoring of compliance with agreed policies.

Voting and engagement

The Trustees have adopted a policy of delegating voting decisions on stocks to their investment managers on the basis that voting power will be exercised by them with the objective of preserving and enhancing long term shareholder value.

The investment managers are expected to exercise the voting rights attached to individual investments in accordance with their own house policy.

The investment managers should use engagement with company management for positive influence as opposed to divestment from companies unaligned with the Scheme’s objectives.

The Trustees do not engage directly but believe it is sometimes appropriate for its investment managers to engage with key stakeholders which may include corporate management, regulators and governance bodies, relating to their investments in order to consider the management of conflicts of interest and improve corporate behaviours, improve performance and mitigate financial risks. Where necessary, investment managers are expected to notify the Trustees of any issue on which it may be beneficial for the Trustees to undertake further engagement. The Trustees will review engagement activity undertaken by their investment managers as part of its broader monitoring activity.

Responsibility for investment decisions has been delegated to the investment managers which includes consideration of the capital structure of investments and the appropriateness of any investment made. Where managers are responsible for investing in new issuance, the Trustees expect the manager to engage with the issuer about the terms on which capital is issued and the potential impact on the rights of new and existing investors.

The Trustees will regularly review engagement activity including voting undertaken by their investment managers.

Monitoring

The Trustee aims to meet with all of its investment managers on an annual basis. The Trustees provide its managers with an agenda for discussion, including, where appropriate, ESG issues. Managers are challenged both directly by the Trustees and by the investment advisers on the impact of any significant issues including, where appropriate, ESG issues that may affect the prospects for return from the portfolio.

Investment Managers report on voting activity to the Trustee at least annually, or more frequently if required, where the information is available. As required, the Trustees will monitor managers voting activity and voting patterns. The Trustees may also monitor managers’ voting on particular companies or issues affecting more than one company.

Aston University Pension Scheme

Statement of Compliance with the Aston University Pension Scheme’s (“the Scheme”) Stewardship Policy for the year ending 31 March 2021

Introduction

This is the Trustees’ statement prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Occupational Pension Schemes (Investment and Disclosure) (Amendment) Regulations 2019. This statement sets out how the Trustees have complied with the Scheme’s Stewardship Policy during the period from 1 April 2020 to 31 March 2021.

Stewardship policy

The Trustees’ Stewardship (voting and engagement) Policy sets out how the Trustees will behave as an active owner of the Scheme’s assets, which includes the Trustees’ approach to:

the exercise of voting rights attached to assets; and
undertaking engagement activity, including how the Trustees monitor and engages with their investment managers and any other stakeholders.

The Scheme’s Stewardship Policy can be found within the Statement of Investment Principles (“SIP”). The SIP and the Stewardship Policy are reviewed on an annual basis.

Following the last review of the SIP in September 2020, the Trustee made the following addition to the Stewardship Policy:

The Trustees separately consider any conflicts of interest arising in the management of the Scheme and its investments and has ensured that each manager has an appropriate conflicts of interest policy in place. Managers are required to disclose any potential or actual conflict of interest to the Trustees.

The Trustees have delegated voting and engagement activity in respect of the underlying assets to the Scheme’s investment managers. The Trustees believe it is important that their investment managers take an active role in the supervision of the companies in which they invest, both by voting at shareholder meetings and engaging with the management on issues that affect a company’s financial performance.

The Trustees’ own engagement activity is focused on their dialogue with their investment managers, which is undertaken in conjunction with their investment advisers. The Trustees meet regularly with their managers and the Trustees consider managers’ exercise of their stewardship both during these meetings and through reporting provided by their investment adviser annually.

The Trustees also monitor their compliance with their Stewardship Policy on an annual basis and are satisfied that they have complied with the Scheme’s Stewardship Policy over the last year.

Voting activity

The Trustees seek to ensure that their managers are excising voting rights and, where appropriate, to monitor managers’ voting patterns. On an annual basis, the Trustees monitor investment managers’ voting on particular companies or issues that affect more than one company.

The Trustees has invested in equity assets through several pooled LGIM Funds and the Schroders Global Equity fund. The managers have reported on how votes were cast in the mandate as set out in the table below.

LGIM Equities

	UK Equity	North America Equity	Europe ex UK Equity	Japan Equity	Asia Pacific ex Japan Equity	Global Emerging Markets Equity
Proportion of Equity assets	48.3%	16.0%	15.0%	5.7%	6.5%	8.5%
No. of meetings eligible to vote at during year	943	794	686	551	534	5139
No. of resolutions eligible to vote on during year	12,574	9,495	11,412	6,518	3,774	44,755
% of resolutions voted	100.0%	100.0%	99.9%	100.0%	100.0%	99.8%
% of resolutions voted with management	92.9%	71.8%	84.2%	86.1%	74.2%	82.6%
% of of resolutions voted against management	7.1%	28.2%	15.3%	13.9%	25.8%	16.1%
% of resolutions abstained	-0.0%	-0.0%	0.5%	0.0%	-0.0%	1.4%
% of meetings with at least one vote against management	3.3%	7.8	4.4%	5.9%	10.1%	6.0%

The resolutions that LGIM voted against management the most on over the year were mainly in relation to the executive remuneration and one-off payments to the Board of Directors.

Schroders - Global Equity Fund

	Schroders - Global Equity Fund
Proportion of Scheme assets	19.2%
No. of meetings eligible to vote at during the year	48
No. of resolutions eligible to vote on during the year	727
% of resolutions voted	99.30%
% of resolutions voted with management	90.07%
% of resolutions voted against management	9.65%
% of resolutions abstained	0.28%
& of meetings with at least one vote against management	39.58%

Significant votes

The Trustees have asked their managers to report on the most significant votes cast within the funds they manage on behalf of the Trustees. The managers were asked to explain the reasons why votes identified were significant, the size of the position in the portfolio, how they voted, any engagement they had undertaken with the company and the outcome of the vote. Schroders have not provided information on any significant votes, however, from LGIM’s report, the Trustees have identified the following votes as being of greater relevance to the Scheme:

Legal & General Investment Management

Date	Company	Subject (theme and summary)	Manager's vote and rationale	Relevant LGIM funds
5 May 2020	Lagardère	Corporate Governance - Activist Amber Capital, which owned 16% of the share capital at the time of engagement, proposed 8 new directors to the Supervisory Board of Lagardère, as well as to remove all the incumbent directors (apart from two 2019) appointments).	For - Proposals by Amber were due to the opinion that the company strategy was not creating value for shareholders, that board members were not sufficiently challenging management on strategic decisions, and for various governance failures.	LGIM Europe excluding UK Fund
7 May 2020	Barclays	Climate Change - approving Barclays' commitment to tackling climate change and ShareAction's Requisitioned Resolution	For - The resolution proposed by Barclays sets out its long-term plans for tackling climate change, and has the backing of ShareAction and co-filers	LGIM UK Equity Fund
27 May 2020	ExxonMobil	Corporate Governance - Reappoint of Director Darren W.Woods proposed by the Chair of the Board.	Against - Due to concerns on climate change and the company's political lobbying, LGIM's voting policy has sanctioned the reappointment of directors responsible for nominations and renumeration.	LGIM North America Equity Fund
7 September 2020	International Consolidated Airlines	Executive Remuneration - approving the proposed Remuneration Report	Against - LGIM were concerned about the level the level of bonus payments, which are 80% to 90% of salary for current executives, and 100% of salary for the departing CEO. LGIM noted that they expected the remuneration committee to exercise greater discretion in light of the financial situation of the company given the COVID-19 crisis, and also to reflect the stakeholder experience.	LGIM UK Equity Fund
13 October 2020	Procter & Gamble	Climate Change - report on effort to eliminate deforestation	For - P&G use both forest pulp and palm oil as raw materials within its products, which are both considered leading drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. The company has only obtained certification from the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil for on third of its palm oil supply, despite setting a goal for 100% certification by 2020.	LGIM North America Equity Fund
22 November 2020	Whitehaven Coal	Climate Change - approving capital protection, by which shareholders are asking the company for a report on the potential wind-down of the company's coal operations, with the potential to return increasing amounts of capital to shareholders.	For - LGIM advocates for a managed decline for fossil fuel companies, in line with global climate targets, with capital being returned to shareholders instead of spent on diversification and growth projects that risk becoming stranded assets.	LGIM Asia Pacific excluding Japan Fund
26 November 2020	Fast Retailing Co. Limited	Corporate Governance - Election of Director Yanai Tadashi	Against - LGIM aspires to all boards comprising 30% women. Given Fast Retailing does not meet this standard, LGIM opposed the election to signal that the company should act on this issue.	LGIM Japan Equity Fund
11 February 2021	Tyson Foods	Human rights - report on Human Rights Due Diligence	For - A shareholder-led resolution requested that the company produce a report on Tyson's human rights due diligence process. LGIM believes that companies in which they invest their clients' capital should uphold their duty to ensure the health and safety of employees over profits.	LGIM North America Equity Fund
11 March 2021	AmerisourceB ergen Corporation	Executive remuneration - Ratify named Executive Officers compensation	Against - To signal LGIM's concern over the overall increased compensation package during a year that the company recorded a $6.6 billion charge related to opoid lawsuits and a total operating loss of $5.1 billion.	LGIM North America Equity Fund

Schroders Investment Management

Information regarding significant votes undertaken by the Schroders Global Equity Fund over the year to 31 March 2021 were not made available.

The lack of information provided further supports our desire to move to a more ESG friendly fund where reporting is more transparent and easier to attain.

Engagement activity

The Trustees aim to meet with their investment managers on a regular basis. At these meetings, stewardship issues are discussed in further detail. Over the 12 months to 31 March 2021, the Trustees did not meet with their managers, in part due to undertaking an investment strategy review. However they will do so upon completion of the investment transition following the strategy review implementation.

Summary of manager engagement activity

The Trustee receives annual reporting on each managers engagement activity. The following table summarises the key engagement activity for the 12-month period ending 31 March 2021.

Fund	Voting rights/Engagements	Topics engaged on
Schroders - Indirect Real Estate	The fund engaged with 16 entities over the year	Environmental: Climate change, Natural resource use and impact, including biodiversity, Pollution, Waste. Social: Conduct, culture and ethics, Human and labour rights, Human capital management, Inequality, Public health Governance: Board effectiveness, Leadership, Remuneration, Shareholder rights. Firm strategy & risk management: Capital allocation, Corporate reporting, Financial performance, Firm strategy/purpose, Risk Management
Schroders - UK Real Estate	n/a	This fund invests in direct real estate which is under active management, and engagement forms an integral and continuous process with a range of stakeholders including occupiers, communities, service providers, environment and investors. Reporting of engagement activity as defined in this statement is not appropriate to this fund. In the course of managing the Fund Schroders carries outs its responsibilities with consideration for all relevant topics under environmental, social, governance, and strategy and risk management considerations.
Schroders - Global Equities	The fund engaged in 705 votes over the year.	Executive remuneration, reducing environmental harm pay equality, sustainability, human rights
LGIM Equities	Voting rights as these funds invest in equities. The team initiated 974 engagement with companies on an ongoing basis over the year.	Climate risk management, Remuneration, Diversity (gender and ethnicity), Board composition & Effectiveness, Strategy
LGIM Corporate Bonds	No voting rights, as this is a fixed income portfolio.	Climate change, Social housing, Environmental issues, Corporate governance

Use of a proxy adviser

Manager	Proxy Advisor used
LGIM	ISS - 'ProxyExchange'

The Trustee has sought to compare the extent of LGIM’s alignment with their proxy advisor, ISS, in order to judge the independence of LGIM’s voting process. Of the resolutions that LGIM did vote on (43,773), they voted contrary to the recommendation of ISS in 0.45% of cases.

From the above we note that LGIM votes on the majority of occasions with the proxy advisor but maintains further independence on voting against resolutions.

Review of policies

The Trustee has committed to reviewing the managers’ RI policies on a regular basis. This review was last undertaken by the Trustee on 12 May 2020. The review considered managers’ broader approach to responsible investment issues in addition to considering any change in approach by the manager over the year. The Trustee also considered changes to their managers’ voting policies.

The Trustee and its advisors remain satisfied that the responsible investment policies of the managers and, where appropriate, the voting policies remain suitable for the Plan.

Additional Voluntary Contributions (AVCs)

The Trustees closed the AVC arrangement to new contributions in January 2012.

Signed For and on Behalf of the Trustees of the Aston University Pension Scheme.

Find your course