This report shows public data only. Is this your organisation? If so, login here to view your full report.

Danske Bank

PRI reporting framework 2017

Export Public Responses
Pdf-img

You are in Direct - Listed Equity Active Ownership » (Proxy) voting and shareholder resolutions

(Proxy) voting and shareholder resolutions

Overview

LEA 17. Voting policy & approach

New selection options have been added to this indicator. Please review your prefilled responses carefully.

17.1. Indicate whether your organisation has a formal voting policy.

17.2. Indicate what your voting policy covers:

17.3. Attach or provide a URL to your voting policy. [Optional]

URL

Attach document


17.4. Provide a brief overview of your organization’s approach to (proxy) voting.

The Group's main ownership activities are described in RI Policy and the Group Ownership Policy. The purpose of the ownership policy is to protect and promote the long-term value creation in the listed companies in which the Group invests on behalf of its clients.

The ownership activities consist of analysts' and portfolio managers' dialogue with companies as part of the investment process, and secondarily voting activities on selected funds.

The purpose of the Responsible Policy is serve our customers interests by creating both competitive and sustainable returns. Voting is done on a select number of Nordic and European equity funds. The object is to protect and promote the long term value generation in the companies in which we are invested.

17.5. Provide an overview of how you ensure your voting policy is adhered to, giving details of your approach when exceptions to the policy are made (if applicable).

The Responsible Investment Board in Danske Bank monitors the ownership activities. All voting instructions are logged and reported to the local fund management companies – with up to a quarterly update of local fund management boards.


Process

LEA 18. Typical approach to (proxy) voting decisions

18.1. Indicate how you typically make your (proxy) voting decisions.

Approach

Based on

18.2. Additional information.[Optional]

Our service provider forms an opinion on each item at AGM/EGMs and formulate their recommendations accordingly. Our RI team provides our portfolio managers with these recommendations. These can help guide them in the voting process but our portfolio managers always make their own recommendations based on their extensive knowledge and dialogue with our portfolio companies so we use our service providers’ recommendations as third party input.


LEA 19. Percentage of voting recommendations reviewed (Not Applicable)


LEA 20. Confirmation of votes (Private)


LEA 21. Securities lending programme (Private)


LEA 22. Informing companies of the rationale of abstaining/voting against management

New selection options have been added to this indicator. Please review your prefilled responses carefully.

22.1. Indicate whether you or the service providers acting on your behalf raise any concerns with companies ahead of voting

          When there is a need for holding discussions with the company management directly.
        

22.2. Indicate whether you and/or the service provider(s) acting on your behalf, communicate the rationale to companies, when , you abstain or vote against management recommendations.

          In some cases we have chosen to elaborate on our concerns and the company has sometimes chosen to amend their proposals because of this. However, we have not communicated actively about these rationales publicly.
        

22.3. Additional information. [Optional]


Outputs and outcomes

LEA 23. Percentage of (proxy) votes cast

23.1. For listed equities where you and/or your service provider have the mandate to issue (proxy) voting instructions, indicate the percentage of votes cast during the reporting year.

Votes cast (to the nearest 1%)

97 %

Specify the basis on which this percentage is calculated

23.2. Explain your reason(s) for not voting certain holdings

23.3. Additional information. [Optional]


LEA 24. Proportion of ballot items that were for/against/abstentions

24.1. Indicate if you track the voting instructions that you and/or your service provider on your behalf have issued.

24.2. Of the voting instructions that you and/or third parties on your behalf issued, indicate the proportion of ballot items that were:

Voting instructions
Breakdown as percentage of votes cast
For (supporting) management recommendations
98 %
Against (opposing) management recommendations
2 %
Abstentions
0 %
100%

24.3. Describe the actions you take after voting against management recommendations.

          We have on several occasions chosen to elaborate on our concerns and the company has sometimes chosen to amend their proposals because of this. However, we have not communicated actively about these rationales publicly.
        

24.4. Additional information. [Optional]


LEA 25. Shareholder resolutions (Not Completed)


LEA 26. Examples of (proxy) voting activities (Private)


Communication

LEA 27. Disclosing voting activities

27.1. Indicate if your organisation proactively discloses information on your voting activities.

27.5. Indicate the voting information your organisation proactively discloses to clients/beneficiaries.

Indicate how much of your voting record you disclose

Indicate what level of explanation you provide

27.6. Indicate how frequently you report voting information.

Please specify

          Voting instructions are disclosed on clients’ request and only if an AGM withdraws special attention the Group will communicate publicly about its stance.
        

27.8. Additional information. [Optional]


Top