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

CDC - Caisse des dépôts et consignations

PRI reporting framework 2018

Export Public Responses

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

(Proxy) voting and shareholder resolutions


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.

Caisse des Dépôts bases its governance decisions on its internal General Principles for the governance of listed companies. This publicly available document directs its positions when fulfilling its responsibilities as a shareholder, through voting at General Meetings and in its dialogue with listed companies in its portfolio. These principles take into account various French and international guidelines, such as the AFEP-MEDEF Corporate Governance Code for Listed Companies, the OECD Principles of Corporate Governance, the ICGN's Global Corporate Governance Principles, and the PRI.


The Caisse des Dépôts voting guide, which is an extension of the General Principles for the governance of listed companies, sets out the technical rules to apply for resolutions submitted to a vote.

In practice, all resolutions are assessed by a dedicated division, in accordance with the voting guide, and communicated to the portfolio managers. The vote is then cast by mail or in situ at French General Meetings, or by proxy for foreign companies.


Caisse des Dépôts votes at all the shareholder meetings held by companies in which it has an interest, and is required to vote against some resolutions when they turn out to be in contradiction with its governance principles and its voting guide.


LEA 16. Typical approach to (proxy) voting decisions

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


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).

Each resolution is formally analysed by in house team in the light of voting guide criteria.

Each potential exception is discussed collegially by the voting committee, has to be motivated, and if necessary (eg no consensus) escalated to board.

16.3. Additional information.[Optional]

In addition,  CDC also uses proxy voting research to complement and compare its own voting
analysis with a third party opinion, notably for countries where governance practices differ most
from Europe.

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

LEA 18. Confirmation of votes

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

18.1. Describe your involvement in any projects to improve the voting trail and/or to obtain vote confirmation .

          For all AGM, CDC systematically requests a vote confirmation from its proxy voting platform and
from its depositary bank.
In addition, for some AGM and according to specific subjects/resolutions, CDC could decide to
attend the meetings in person and to vote (23 AGM in 2017)

18.2. Additional information. [OPTIONAL]


LEA 19. Securities lending programme

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

19.1. Indicate if your organisation has a securities lending programme.

19.2. Describe why your organisation does not lend securities?

The asset management departments took this decision from an ethical standpoint.

19.4. Additional information.


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]

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

          we vote all ballots

21.3. Additional information. [Optional]

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
86.5 %
Against (opposing) management recommendations
13.2 %
0.3 %

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

          We examine shareholder resolutions and decide on a case by case basis based on voting policy
which is reviewed every year

22.4. Additional information. [Optional]

LEA 23. Shareholder resolutions

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

23.1. Indicate if your organisation directly or via a service provider filed or co-filed any ESG shareholder resolutions during the reporting year.

23.6. Describe whether your organisation reviews ESG shareholder resolutions filed by other investors.

Yes we review external resolutions and can support such resolutions.

23.7. Additional information. [Optional]

LEA 24. Examples of (proxy) voting activities

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

24.1. Provide examples of the (proxy) voting activities that your organisation and/or service provider carried out during the reporting year.

ESG Factors
ESG issue
          climate change disclosure
Conducted by

Engagement with companies to develop and communicate ambitious targets on carbon fooprint reduction. 

Scope and Process

Review of shareholder resolutions and potential ex ante announcement of support.  


Ex ante public support for one resolution (Shell)

ESG Factors
ESG issue
          board diversity
Conducted by

Challenge companies on boad diversity. 

Scope and Process

Review the general assembly resolutions


Votes against new board nominations if diversity is not sufficiently ensured

ESG Factors
ESG issue
          Executive remuneration
Conducted by

To limit global pay package for CEO to a reasonable amount (< 5 MEUR)

Scope and Process

All companies. Review of "say on pay" resolutions (ex ante or/and ex post)


Votes against remuneration packages exceding our threshold

24.2. Additional information. [Optional]