“In reality, figures provided by Lambeth’s pension fund managers show that the pension fund has no exposure to companies linked with activity in the occupied territories as listed by the United Nations Human Rights Council.
“It is important to note that the council does not make direct decisions on these investments. Such investments are legally separate from council decision-making and are administered by the Pensions Committee which is bound by strict rules.
“The Pensions Committee is legally required to ensure the fund can afford to pay out benefits to pensioners when they become due without significantly increasing the financial burden on employers who contribute to the fund, the largest of which is the council.
“As a result, the council has rejected a resident petition on this topic as it calls for the council to take actions that it does not have the legal authority to do.
“While matters of foreign policy are the responsibility of the UK government not local authorities, the council’s focus as an organisation is on community cohesion in our borough. Lambeth is a proud Borough of Sanctuary, and we celebrate our incredible diversity which is the foundation upon which our wonderful borough is built.”
Council motion on pension investments
A motion on pension investments was adopted after a vote at the meeting of full Council on Wednesday 21, January at Lambeth Town Hall. It was agreed that the concerns raised in the motion be highlighted to the Chair of the Pensions Committee and the Pensions Board.
This week the Lambeth Pension Fund also successfully retained its status as a signatory to the UK Stewardship Code. This reflects its successes in responsible investment, long-term value creation for members of the pension fund and strong engagement with stakeholders.
Chair of Lambeth’s Pensions Committee
Councillor Martin Bailey, the Chair of Lambeth’s Pensions Committee, said: “The Pension Fund exists to serve working people in this borough, both now and in retirement. The Committee’s responsibility is to govern the fund properly, weighing all financially material risks, including human rights risk, with care, evidence and within the law.
“The claims being made about the fund’s investments do not reflect the facts. As matters stand, the fund has no exposure to companies operating in the occupied territories as identified by the United Nations Human Rights Council.
“That position is kept under review through established stewardship, engagement and risk-monitoring arrangements, not through gestures or campaigns that may sound principled but do not stand up to scrutiny.
“People are right to want their pensions invested responsibly. They should also expect decisions to be taken in a way that is serious, lawful and focused on long-term outcomes for members and employers. That balance is at the heart of responsible stewardship, and it is the approach this Committee applies.”
Members vote
Members also voted on January 21 to ensure the Council’s procurement policies include avoidance of supporting companies in violation of international law subject to its statutory powers, the law regarding procurement and ensuring this did not expose the Council to legal challenge.
