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

Alphinity Investment Management Limited

PRI reporting framework 2020

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


LEA 12. Typical approach to (proxy) voting decisions

12.1. (委任状による)議決権行使を通常どのように決定しているかを明示して下さい。



12.2. 合意された議決権ポリシーがどのように遵守されているかを概観し、ポリシーの例外が適用された場合(該当する場合)のアプローチの詳細を示してください。

It is the same people who determine the voting policy that make the decisions about the votes and instruct the votes to be made. Contentious issues are generally discussed among the investment team

We use the advice of two proxy advisors but make our own decisions about votes, subject to the direction of individual clients. 

12.3. 補足情報[任意]

We consider the recommendations of two proxy advisors but ultimately make our own decision on voting. Any vote adverse to board or management  recommendation is clearly raised with the company in advance of the vote for clarification and to encourage better future corporate behaviour. Some of our wholesale clients exercise their votes themselves and generally seek advice from us, especially on controversial matters; others may occasionally instruct us to vote in a certain way, however any instruction by a client does not bind our vote for the other shares at our discretion. 

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

LEA 14. Securities lending programme

14.1. 貴社では、セキュリティーズレンディングを設定していますか?

14.2. 貴社がセキュリティーズレンディングをしていない理由を説明してください。(最大500語)

We consider lending securities to be against the interests of the clients who have entrusted us with their funds

14.4. 補足情報 [任意]

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

15.1. 報告年度内に関与した議決権行使のうち、貴社、または貴社の代理を務めるサービスプロバイダーが議決権行使に先立って企業に懸念を表明したものの割合を示してください。

15.2. これらの企業に対し、議決権行使に先立って懸念を表明した理由を示してください。

15.3. 補足情報 [任意]

We raise any contentious issue with the company involved before deciding on the final vote in order to ensure we have a full understanding of the issue involved and the company's perspective on it. Generally speaking it is better to have this sort of dialogue outside the company general meeting schedule as by that time the agnda has already been set and it is too late to influence, other than by making an adverse vote which might be emotionally satisfying but probably doesn't achieve very much

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

16.1. 貴社または貴社の代理を務めるサービスプロバイダーが、議決権行使を棄権する場合、または経営陣の提案に反対票を投じる場合に、当該企業にその根拠を伝えた議決権の割合を示してください。これは行使可能な全議決権の中で占める割合とします。

16.3. 貴社が議決権行使を棄権するまたは経営陣の提案に反対票を投じる根拠を伝える場合、この根拠を公表しているか示してください。

16.4. 補足情報[任意]

We are happy to share this information with clients but at this point not with the general public. The vote itself however is public

LEA 17. Percentage of (proxy) votes cast

17.1. 貴社やサービスプロバイダーが(代理)投票の指示を発行するマンデートを有している上場株式について、報告年度中に行った投票の割合を記載してください。


100 %


17.3. 補足情報[任意]



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

18.1. 貴社または貴社の代理を務めるサービスプロバイダーが出した議決権行使に係る指示を追跡しているか示してください。

18.2. 貴社または貴社の代理を務める第三者が出した議決権行使に係る指示のうち、各投票項目の占める割合を示してください。

95 %
05 %
0 %

18.3. 貴社が経営陣の提案に対する反対票を投じたケースにおいて、貴社がエンゲージメントを行った企業の占める割合を示してください。


18.4. 補足情報 [任意]

We do not see voting against as a source of pride, rather it is disappointing to have to do it as it suggests our expectations of management was not clearly enough stated or our views were ignored.

Due to the quality of companies we own and the vetting process they go through in order to get into the portfolio, we do not often need to vote against management recommendations

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

19.1. 不首尾に終わった議決権行使後の正式なエスカレーション戦略が貴社にあるか示してください。

19.2. 棄権後、または経営陣に反対する票を投じた後に貴社が用いるエスカレーション戦略を示してください。

19.3. 補足情報 [任意]

Reaction depends on the seriousness of the issue. If it were serious enough we would consider divestment although this would be extreme, few matters that come before boards are that critical

If moderately serious we would collaborate with other investors, most likely through RIAA or PRI channels

More likely reaction is to re-engage with the company and set out the reasons why we voted against the issue and encourage the company to think/behave differently for future

LEA 20. Shareholder resolutions

20.1. 貴社が報告年度中に、直接もしくはサービスプロバイダーを介して、ESG株主決議を提出または共同提出したか示してください。

20.7. 補足情報[任意] 

LEA 21. Examples of (proxy) voting activities

21.1. 報告年度に貴社またはサービスプロバイダーが実行した(委任状による)議決権行使の例を提供してください。

Executive Remuneration|Company leadership issues

Assess the appropriateness of what at first seemed to be a fairly convoluted and lucrative remuneration structure


A property development company disclosed what appeared to be extreme outcomes for management remuneration last year, which caused concern in the investment community. We engaged extensively with directors to understand the structure and how the outcomes were arrived at. The company had performed extremely well and much of the apparent pay was a result of shares having appreciated several times over the period of time between issuance some years ago and when they vested. Actual pay for the current year was quite moderate (in a relative sense) and we supported the remuneration report

Climate Change|Political spending / lobbying

Gas exploration company was not, in our view, adequately disclosing future emissions projections so the market was unabile to assess whether or not it was consistent with Paris goals. It was also a member of an industry body that appeared to be working against the interests of controlling emissions.


We engaged with the company in advance of the shareholder meeting to get its view on the resolutions. When it transpired it would not, in our view, adequately respond to them we voted in favour of two of the resolutions (although not the enabling resolution) in order to send a message to the board that it should be more proactive. We will keep engaging over the next year to encourage compliance and would consider voting in favour of the enabling resolution in the future if adequate action is not seen.


21.2. 補足情報[任意]

We do not use a service provider for anything other than the mechanical action of voting - we assess and decide on the merits of each issue before the meeting

It is worth noting that effective engagement needs to be undertaken well before an issue is put to proxies: by that time the issues are generally decided and it is too late to exercise any influence other than by voting against something, which generally feels good but often doesn't achieve very much. The most effective form of engagement is communicating expectations around the issues facing a particular company well in advance of a vote being taken, which is what we try to do.

In our market, the most common resolutions put to company meetings are regarding voting on directors and remuneration matters