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

CBRE Global Investors

PRI reporting framework 2018

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 15. Voting policy & approach

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

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

15.2. Indicate what your voting policy covers:

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

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

CBRE Clarion has engaged Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) to provide proxy voting administration services, including the tracking of proxies received for clients, providing notice of votes due, casting ballots and recordkeeping.

CBRE Clarion has established proxy voting guidelines based on a template provided by ISS. The guidelines are reviewed and approved by designated members of the investment team on an annual basis.  The guidelines are provided to ISS to facilitate processing of proxy votes.

Voting decisions remain entirely within the discretion of CBRE Clarion. When a pending vote is identified, the ballot is forwarded to the appropriate investment analyst for review, along with any available research or supplemental information concerning the ballot items.  The analyst makes the voting decision.  If the voting decision contravenes the firm's guidelines, the decision must be approved by a designated senior member of the investment team. 

ISS provides recordkeeping services, including copies of each proxy statement received and each vote cast.  CBRE Clarion can access this information and will provide proxy voting reports to clients on request.  A number of clients receive regular proxy voting reports.


Process

LEA 16. Typical approach to (proxy) voting decisions

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

Approach

Based on

16.2. 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 operation of our proxy voting policies and procedures are tested annually by an external auditor as part of a service organization control (SOC) engagement.

16.3. Additional information.[Optional]

CBRE Clarion has established its own proxy voting guidelines based on a template provided by ISS. Proxy voting guidelines are reviewed and approved by designated investment team personnel on an annual basis.  In this context, particular thematic issues are identified. 

Pending votes are monitored through a system maintained by ISS.  When a vote is identified, the ballot is forwarded to the appropriate investment analyst for review, along with any available research or supplemental information.  CBRE Clarion uses research provided by ISS and Glass-Lewis to supplement the efforts of the analyst team.  The analyst makes the voting decision. If the voting decision contravenes the firm's guidelines, the decision must be approved by a designated senior member of the investment team.


LEA 17. Percentage of voting recommendations reviewed (Not Applicable)


LEA 18. Confirmation of votes (Private)


LEA 19. Securities lending programme (Private)


LEA 20. 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.

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

20.2. 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.

20.3. Additional information. [Optional]

The determination whether to communicate with companies before or after voting largely depends on the significance of the issue or the materiality of the company is our clients’ portfolios. 


Outputs and outcomes

LEA 21. Percentage of (proxy) votes cast

21.1. 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%)

100 %

Specify the basis on which this percentage is calculated

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

21.3. Additional information. [Optional]

During 2017, there were a total of 53,332 ballot proposals.  Of those, there were 79 proposals as to which we either did not vote, abstained or withheld our vote, leading to a 99.85% voting percentage.  Reasons for not voting are attributable to a variety of circumstances, including client securities lending programs, share blocking or receipt of ballot (from client custodian bank) too late to cast a ballot.  In very rare instances, we make an affirmative decision not to vote, which may include situations in which our firm has a conflict of interest in relation to the proposal.


LEA 22. Proportion of ballot items that were for/against/abstentions

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

22.2. 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
Against (opposing) management recommendations
Abstentions
100%

22.3. Describe the actions you take in relation to voting against management recommendations.

          None
        

22.4. Additional information. [Optional]


LEA 23. Shareholder resolutions (Private)


LEA 24. Examples of (proxy) voting activities (Private)


Top