Policy on Socially Responsible Investment

The University Court is committed to socially responsible investment and will via its Investment Advisory Committee and Pension Scheme Trustees actively encourage its fund managers:

(i)	to continue to commit to SRI within their investment policies; and 
(ii)	to continue to use the Ethical Investment Research Service (EIRIS) (or a similar service) to monitor the behaviour of companies in SRI

When a fund manager does not follow this line, the University should consider whether or not to change the manager at an appropriate and cost-effective point in time. 

The one business activity in which the University should continue to instruct its fund managers not to invest is the tobacco industry as such an investment runs entirely counter to the University's direct interests in research.

Fund managers should be asked to supply copies of their voting records in relation to companies where concerns may have been expressed about lack of attention to social, ethical or environmental matters.

Groups from within the University may make representations in respect of an investment or investments held by the University, where those groups have concerns.  Representations should be made in writing to the Secretary of Court.  Such representations will be considered on the following basis:

1. The key criterion against which specific cases would be considered would be whether the activity complained of and substantiated by the concerned group, was wholly contrary to the University’s value systems either as reflected in the Mission Statement or the Strategic Plan or in regard to wider issues of social, environmental and humanitarian concern. 
2.  Expressions of concern should be related to specific companies whose activities or values appear, on the basis of clear evidence, to be so far removed from the University’s core values as to give grounds for serious concern.  Cases would only be considered if brought forward by the SRC as the recognised student body, or a recognised trade union, or via the University’s committee structure.
3.  Cases would be considered by a Court group in the first instance.  The group will comprise 2 lay members of Court, a Senate Assessor, an SRC representative from Court and the Secretary of Court.  The group would be expected to take into account the current extent of the fund managers’ engagement with the company with respect to the concerns raised. It would be for the group to decide whether there were sufficiently strong grounds to warrant engagement with the company through the mechanisms established by the fund managers where this was not already in hand, or to request strengthening of that engagement if already active.   The group would ask the Investment Advisory Committee or the Pension Scheme Trustees to communicate with the fund managers about these issues.  
4.  If a situation arose in which such engagement did not assuage serious concerns raised about a particular company, it might be concluded by the Court on the recommendation of the Court group that it should disinvest in the company.  The Investment Advisory Committee or Pension Scheme Trustees would be requested to make the financial consequences of such a decision clear to the group during the course of its deliberations.  

The University will publish annually on its website a list of companies and other funds in which investments are held.

An annual report will be made to Court via the Finance Committee in respect of the investment funds.

October 2009