RMPP signs up to Stewardship Code

[RobertT]

https://www.pensions-expert.com/ESG/Nin ... de?ct=true

Nine new pension funds sign up to UK Stewardship Code

HSBC Bank (UK) Pension Scheme, Royal Mail Pension Plan, and the NatWest Group Pension Fund are among the nine new pension schemes that have successfully signed up to the UK Stewardship Code.

The Financial Reporting Council published on September 7 an update to the list of signatories to the UK Stewardship Code following its spring 2022 assessment.

Following “an extensive review process which considered organisations’ investment styles, sizes and types”, 43 new signatories were added, the regulator said.

Among these are nine pension schemes, with the Essex Pension Fund, London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund, Northern Ireland Local Government Officers' Superannuation Committee, Superannuation Arrangements of the University of London, West Yorkshire Pension Fund and Wiltshire Pension Fund also joining the list.

The code, which sets high standards of stewardship for those investing money on behalf of UK savers and pensioners, now has 236 signatories with assets under management of £40.7tn, up from £33.3tn.

The FRC noted it was “also encouraging” that signatories reporting for their second year, after first applying in 2021, had “in most cases used the feedback they received to improve” their application.

The regulator saw improvements in several areas, “such as the quality of activity and outcome reporting for engagement, collaboration and escalation”.

It also noted advances in “contributions to addressing market-wide and systemic risks, and improving the functioning of the financial markets”, and in the “reporting on how signatories monitor and hold to account third parties, such as asset managers and service providers”.

However, the FRC stated: “There still needs to be greater emphasis by signatories on reporting their activities and outcomes during the reporting period, using both quantitative and qualitative evidence, as the FRC will increase focus on this area in future assessment updates.”

Mark Babington, executive director of regulatory standards at the FRC, noted that it is “great to see improvements in how organisations are evidencing their stewardship each year, and more tailored explanations on how they apply the code to demonstrate their stewardship activity and outcomes effectively”.

He added: “Using our feedback to provide clear, comprehensive and outcome-based reporting is what the spirit of the code is all about and why it is considered the gold standard for stewardship across the globe.”

[freespeech]

Is there any hope in correcting the ridiculous position of not including the cash balance fund or AVC's in quotes?

[RobertT]

Is there any hope in correcting the ridiculous position of not including the cash balance fund or AVC's in quotes?

I don't think the Stewardship Code is really aimed at the service they provide to us, but I agree that the DBCBS and AVC's should be included in all quotes. Even if it's a rough estimate, that will at least give members a better idea of the total benefits they can expect.

With the help of information that's easily available, it's fairly simple for us to come up with a reasonably accurate value for the DBCBS. I see no reason why the RMPP can't do the same!

I don't know how easy it is for them to find out current AVC values, as I assume they won't be able to just login in the same way we can.
But at one time, AVC valuations were included on the annual statements. So there used to be a method for them to find out – why not now?

Perhaps we should all complain to the RMPP trustees!

[Hyrrokkin]

Is there any hope in correcting the ridiculous position of not including the cash balance fund or AVC's in quotes?

I don't think the Stewardship Code is really aimed at the service they provide to us, but I agree that the DBCBS and AVC's should be included in all quotes. Even if it's a rough estimate, that will at least give members a better idea of the total benefits they can expect.

With the help of information that's easily available, it's fairly simple for us to come up with a reasonably accurate value for the DBCBS. I see no reason why the RMPP can't do the same!

I don't know how easy it is for them to find out current AVC values, as I assume they won't be able to just login in the same way we can.
But at one time, AVC valuations were included on the annual statements. So there used to be a method for them to find out – why not now?

Perhaps we should all complain to the RMPP trustees!

How on earth can they not do as you suggested...a rough estimate to give people a fairer chance of deciding what they want to do with their pension
They simply have to make it clear that this is an estimate to cover themselves
Has anybody asked them why they cannot do this ?
To be honest i find the whole RM pensions confusing,convoluted and a bit of a mess

[RobertT]

I think it ultimately comes down to money!

It'll take longer to process a quote containing the DBCBS and AVC's, and if there's a certain percentage of members just wanting to test the water and not taking it further, maybe the RMSPS & RMPP see it as a waste of time. That time will cost money!

For them, it's not just a case of finding out the values of the DBCBS and AVC's, but turning that information into quotes that are individual to us and are in conjunction with our main scheme benefits.

As things stand, it's up to the members to either make a blind decision or take it on themselves to understand their benefits better. Neither being ideal.

Personally I have a reasonably good idea of how much pension and lump sum I'll be getting from my NRA60,NRA65, DBCBS & AVC's. But it would obviously be better to have that confirmed in writing as soon as I start the process of taking my benefits.

The fact that RM pensions have seen numerous changes to them over the years, makes them increasingly difficult to understand. So much so that many IFA's haven't got a clue.

The RMPP and RMSPS are currently providing a service that isn't up to scratch!