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

Perpetual Investments

PRI reporting framework 2019

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

(Proxy) voting and shareholder resolutions

LEA 12. Typical approach to (proxy) voting decisions

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

Approach

Based on

12.2. 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.

The policy applies to all of the corporate governance monitoring and proxy voting activities of Perpetual Investment Management Limited's fundamental active equity managers in respect of companies we invest in. The role of proxy advisors and the Manager, Responsible Investment (ESG professional) in the voting process provides further reference to our voting policy.

While we will actively promote the governance practices in our voting policy through the way in which we vote and our company engagement, we acknowledge that there are instances where one or more of these practices may not be possible during particular stages of a company's development or in certain circumstances e.g. for tightly-held companies. We will always consider a company's corporate governance practices in the context of what is in the best interests of our clients, and have appropriate regard to the company's circumstances.

 

12.3. Additional information.[Optional]

On all proxy voting decisions, our Head of Equities makes the final voting decision after consideration of:

  • the voting and governance principles set out in Our Corporate Governance and Proxy Voting Policy. An internal ESG resource (The Manager, Responsible Investment) assists in this process;
  • the internal views of relevant company analysts and portfolio managers; 
  • the proxy report, including recommendations, from our external proxy adviser - this includes consideration of current governance norms and standards (e.g. on executive remuneration, director independence, etc.); and
  • any other considerations that are relevent in maximising value for clients.

Paramount in this process is the principle that voting decisions are be made in the clients’ best interests.


LEA 13. Percentage of voting recommendations reviewed (Not Applicable)


LEA 14. Securities lending programme (Private)


LEA 15. Informing companies of the rationale of abstaining/voting against management

15.1. Indicate the proportion of votes where you or the service providers acting on your behalf have raised concerns with companies ahead of voting.

15.2. Indicate the reasons for raising your concerns with these companies ahead of voting.

Explain

          Other relevant issues (case-by-case)
        

15.3. Additional information. [Optional]

In all cases below, we endeavour to both:

  • seek clarification/further information from companies directly prior to voting on contentious issues; and
  • inform companies where we decide to vote against management's recommendation and the reasons why.

 


LEA 16. Informing companies of the rationale of abstaining/voting against management

16.1. Indicate the proportion of votes participated in within the reporting year in which, you and/or the service provider(s) acting on your behalf, have communicated to companies the rationale for abstaining or voting against management recommendations.

16.2. Indicate the reasons your organisation would communicate to companies, the rationale for abstaining or voting against management recommendations.

Explain

          case-by-case
        

16.3. In cases where your organisation does communicate the rationale for the abstention or the vote against management recommendations, indicate whether this rationale is made public.

16.4. Additional information. [Optional]

However certain cases/examples are communicated to clients only


LEA 17. Percentage of (proxy) votes cast

17.1. 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%)

99 %

Specify the basis on which this percentage is calculated

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

17.3. Additional information. [Optional]

We endeavour to always vote our stock, unless there are practical impediments to doing so.


LEA 18. Proportion of ballot items that were for/against/abstentions

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

18.2. 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
95 %
Against (opposing) management recommendations
5 %
Abstentions
0 %
100%

18.3. In cases where your organisation voted against management recommendations, indicate the percentage of companies you have engaged.

95

18.4. Additional information. [Optional]


LEA 19. Proportion of ballot items that were for/against/abstentions

19.1. Indicate whether your organisation has a formal escalation strategy following unsuccessful voting.

19.2. Indicate the escalation strategies used at your organisation following abstentions and/or votes against management.

19.3. Additional information. [Optional]

Voting against a company-sponsored meeting resolution can be a powerful engagement tool. Should this action not have the desired outcome, one or more of the above strategies could be employed to either escalate the issue, or divest. Each case is considered case-by-case.


LEA 20. Shareholder resolutions (Private)


LEA 21. Examples of (proxy) voting activities (Private)


Top