Comment: Ballot best way to settle debate

Jul 2 2008 Liverpool Daily Post

LIVERPOOL city council is pressing ahead with a bold attempt to give a vote to tens of thousands of council workers over whether their pensions funds should be invested ethically.

This is an interesting manoeuvre from the city authority, coming several months after Wirral council – which administers the pension fund – turned down appeals to cease unethical investments.

The resolution looks likely to attract all-party support and is a move which should be commended.

The pension fund manages an investment pot worth around £4bn. Is it really enough for Wirral to argue it has “an ethical dimension” to the investment policy?

This will not be an acceptable situation for many workers; it was certainly something Liverpool, St Helens and Knowsley authorities – whose employees are among the pension fund’s thousands of investors – set little store by when they passed resolutions calling for the fund to pull out of companies involved in the arms trade.

Of course ethical investments may not offer the same returns, and the tax payer may have something to say on the subject of how the pension fund is then topped up.

But there is real merit in continuing this fight.

Can council workers say they are comfortable with their pension fund being invested in arms companies, or in countries where the population is ground down by oppressive regimes? Do they support investment in, for example, companies that pollute without thought for the future?

There are complex arguments for and against this pension fund’s investment, but a ballot for members is surely the best way to settle the debate.

At present those paying into the fund can say with a clear conscience that they have no say over how and where their money is invested. Perhaps if they are given the opportunity what should be done, and to know the consequences of their decision, this argument can be settled once and for all.