Last week, the regulator launched a consultation on its oversight of the DB market to better account for the current low interest rate environment and growing maturity of many funds.The consultation on the new code of practice, open until early February, will also seek to incorporate the regulator’s new statutory objective requiring it to have a “regard for the growth prospects of companies”.The CBI’s survey polled 226 chief executives and board members in companies with £362.2bn (€432.2bn) of pension assets under management.Some 70% of survey respondents with DB schemes reported that the cost of the schemes was having an impact on business investment, with that percentage rising to 78% among manufacturers.Nearly half of respondents (46%) said operating a DB scheme was restricting their ability to borrow, and six out of 10 companies said employer debt regulations were hampering internal corporate restructurings, M&A activity and asset sales.But the survey also found that DB provision seemed to have stabilised following the financial crisis, with 64% of companies saying they did not plan to make any changes to it.However, some 88% of respondents were concerned about the prospect of contributions going up in their next funding agreement with trustees.The survey also found that the number of respondents dissatisfied with the Pensions Regulator’s dealings with their company had more than doubled to 28% from 12% in a 2011 survey.Eight out of 10 businesses said they had yet to see a change in behaviour from the regulator or trustees since the introduction of the new statutory objective. The cost of running a defined benefit (DB) pension scheme is stifling the investment plans of seven out of 10 UK businesses offering them, according to a survey by the CBI and Standard Life Investments.The Pensions Regulator’s new target to minimise the negative effect of scheme funding has had no effect yet, and it needs to change the way it deals with employers and pension scheme trustees, the CBI said.Neil Carberry, director of employment and skills at the organisation, said: “The cost of DB schemes is having a serious adverse impact on business investment, which must be the cornerstone of our economic recovery if we are to achieve sustainable growth.“The regulator needs to raise its game and ensure that a material change in its day-to-day dealings with employers and trustees flows from its new legal duty.”
In terms of sectors and regions, using governance as an indicator of shareholder returns is more useful in Asia and Europe, he said.North American markets are subject to more robust regulation, and companies are at higher risk of litigation, which has led to a generally better standard of governance across companies, making the measure less effective in the region.Lode added: “This distortion in returns is also apparent by sector. If we turn to IT companies, there appears to be a negative relationship between governance scores and shareholder returns. The IT sector is dominated by a small number of companies whose performance over the past five years has been stellar despite a lower focus on their governance structure.”However, despite the positive impact of companies with strong ESG characteristics, the impact of environmental and social factors was negligible.Despite increasing suggestions that companies seeking to tackle environmental and social challenges are more likely to achieve a lower cost of capital and better risk-adjusted returns and are therefore more resistant to share-price volatility, there was no evidence to support this assertion over the same time period.“Overall,” Lode said, ”we found a strong link between underperforming companies and poor corporate governance. Yet, we did not see either a statistically significant relationship between shareholder return and environmental or social metrics.“As more data becomes available, and more asset owners focus on environmental or social considerations, this may change. For now, we conclude that favouring well-governed companies can enhance the return of equity strategies.”Hermes analysed companies in the MSCI World index from the end of 2008 to end of November 2013.In other news, research by CDP and Accenture found that average monetary savings from emissions-reduction efforts have fallen 44% in the past 12 months despite ever more companies reporting on their programmes and clear financial benefits from investment in sustainability measures.According to the report ‘Collaborative action on climate risk’, this is due to an ever-widening gap between measures taken by large corporates and those by suppliers when the most important determinant of improved performance is collaboration across the supply chain.There is enormous scope for more collaboration, with CDP supply chain programme participants identifying 2,186 collaborative opportunities.Companies that engage with two or more suppliers, customers or other partners are more than twice as likely to see a financial return from their emissions-reduction investments and to reduce emissions, according to the report.But companies often misdirect their emissions-reduction efforts with investment not closely correlated with proven emissions or monetary savings.Suppliers and member companies are at odds – suppliers identified process emission reduction and product design as the most promising collaborative approaches, while member companies favour behavioural change initiatives and transportation and fleet investments.The new CDP supply chain initiative ‘Action Exchange’ aims to drive targeted action on the most cost effective emissions reductions.Gary Hanifan, global sustainability lead for supply chain at Accenture, said: “This report provides clear evidence that those who are most transparent about their climate change risks are more likely to achieve the greatest emissions reductions.“And they are also more likely to enjoy monetary savings as a result of their responses to climate change risks. But the return on investment by the most proactive companies will not reach its full potential unless those companies can encourage their suppliers to follow their lead.”The research also found a clear link between stalling progress on emissions reductions within supply chains and the uncertain regulatory framework, with 90% of companies that identify a current or future risk related to climate change citing regulatory risk as a barrier to investment.The report also shows that investment in emissions-reduction programmes has declined in the past year and is shorter term in focus.Seven out of 10 sectors report investment falling from earlier years. Shorter payback initiatives of less than three years are on the rise and almost doubled between 2011 and 2013.The average sum invested per reporting company has dropped 22% since last year.The research is based on information from 2,868 companies producing 14% of 2013’s global industrial emissions.The report can be found at www.cdp.net. Well-governed companies have outperformed poorly governed counterparts by an average of more than 30 basis points per month since the beginning of 2009, according to research from UK-based Hermes Fund Managers.Its report entitled ‘ESG Investing – Does it make you feel good, or is it actually good for your portfolio?’, which examines the impact of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors on equity returns, shows that, on average, companies rated in the top decile in terms of governance outperformed those rated in the bottom decile by more than 30bps per month.The research also highlights that it is the companies with the lowest-ranked governance scores that have tended to underperform the average, rather than the higher-scoring companies outperforming the average.Geir Lode, head of Hermes quantitative equities, said: “Our results suggest it is poor governance that leads to underperformance, rather than good governance leading to outperformance. Furthermore, our research shows that companies with a poor standard of corporate governance underperformed in 61% of the months during the time period.”
The lower house (Sejm) spent a mere four days on the three readings and final vote, and the upper house (Senate) even less time.Another concern centres on changing the second pillar from a mandatory to a voluntary system, and whether the new law actually hampers workers in making their choice.This part of the law comes into effect at the start of April and lasts until the end of July.The funds themselves were banned from advertising as of mid-January, with the ban lasting until the decision period ends.Lewiatan has additionally questioned whether a total advertising ban, as distinct from a ban on misleading advertising, infringes aspects such as proportionality and the rights of commercial entities to disseminate information.The organisation also wants the tribunal to examine the law’s new investment regulations, including the ban on OFE investment in low-risk government securities and their obligation to invest a high proportion (75% this year, 55% in 2015) in higher-risk equities.Lewiatan maintains that these regulations effectively transform the OFEs from retirement funds to investment funds, thus infringing Article 67, which guarantees citizens the right to social security.Lewiatan’s submission is more wide-ranging than that submitted by president Bronisław Komorowski at the end of January, more than a month after signing off on the bill, and which focused essentially on the investment and advertising aspects of the law.In February, the Constitutional Tribunal’s president asked prime minister Donald Tusk, as well as the attorney general and parliament speaker, to detail the financial implications should the law prove unconstitutional.There are other challenges afoot as well.Your Movement, an opposition party with 36 seats in the Sejm, supported by some members of the 16-strong United Poland, has also prepared a submission to the tribunal, but has yet to get more signatories.Under Polish legislation, Sejm submissions need a minimum 50 members.Separately, a Warsaw law firm is launching a class action against the State Treasury and ZUS, arguing that the new law amounts to expropriation.More than 800 Poles have already signed up. Poland’s controversial second-pillar pension reform is now facing its first legal challenge.Polish Confederation Lewiatan, the country’s largest private sector employer organisation, has asked the Constitutional Tribunal to rule on whether several aspects of the new law comply with the Constitution.Lewiatan believes the transfer of 51.1% of second-pillar pension fund (OFE) assets to the Polish Social Insurance Institution (ZUS) – and likewise the incremental transfer of members’ assets to ZUS 10 years before retirement – breach several articles of the Constitution, including those covering expropriation of personal property, violation of property rights and lack of compensation.The organisation has questioned the legality of the lightning speed with which the law was passed by the legislature and the implications for future legislative proceedings.
Interested parties should have at least €500m in assets under management, €200m of which should be in small-cap equities. They do not need to have a track record, although 1-3 years is desirable.Nor is there a minimum or maximum tracking error for either mandate, according to the searches.Performance should be stated to 31 December, gross of fees.Both tenders have a deadline of 29 January.The IPE news team is unable to answer any further questions about IPE Quest tender notices to protect the interests of clients conducting the search. To obtain information directly from IPE Quest, please contact Jayna Vishram on +44 (0) 20 3465 9330 or email firstname.lastname@example.org. Two €50m Asia small-cap equity mandates have been tendered using IPE Quest, one exclusively for Japan and one for the rest of the region. In both cases, a local bottom-up research approach is preferred.According to searches QN-2146 and QN-2147, the investment process should be fundamental long term. The benchmarks for the respective mandates are the MSCI Japan Small Cap Index and the MSCI AC Asia ex Japan Small Cap Index.
“Since the EU funds 14% of IASB’s budget and 60% of EFRAG, both organisations have to follow European standards of democratic legitimacy, transparency, accountability and integrity.”International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) chairman Hans Hoogervorst has in the past warned that the Parliament was “getting out of hand”.Long-term investors that have argued that IFRS accounts fail to deliver a true and fair view of a business’s financial affairs have welcomed the development.Own-initiative reports are a well-established working tool and political instrument of the European Parliament.They can pave the way for new legislative proposals. They can also provide a platform for MEPs to voice opinions on topics of interest, as well as respond to European Commission communications.The strongly worded resolution argues that the IFRS accounting model is incompatible with European law.It also argues that the IASB’s new financial instruments accounting standard, IFRS 9, fails to promote financial stability.Finally, the MEPs have demanded a greater role for the Parliament in the standard-setting process.Local Authority Pension Fund Forum (LAPFF) chairman Cllr Keiran Quinn told IPE: “The very informative ECON report highlights the significant problems with the IFRS system and the governance of the accounting standard setters.“We expect to see structural changes following the way standards are set and endorsed.”The LAPFF has consistently asserted the FRC has been getting the law wrong, not even writing the words of the statute down properly.The FRC, IASB and EFRAG have not upheld the public interest but succumbed to “vested interest groups”.In particular, the ECON report attacks the “decision-useful model of accounting” as being inconsistent with the capital adequacy function of accounting as described in ECJ case law and the Accounting Directive.The ECON committee has also confirmed the long-standing LAPFF position that “the conceptual basis of accounting under the IFRS framework does not encompass the purpose of accounts in EU law, for which a true and fair view of the specific figures is the standard”.The LAPFF has recently sought advice from leading commercial barrister George Bompass QC.He concluded that IFRS, which do not refer specifically to “what is or is not available for distribution by reference to amounts stated in them”, cannot give a true and fair view of a company’s “assets and liabilities, financial position and profits or losses”.The UK Financial Reporting Council has dismissed this position and reiterated its firm view the true and fair view requirement applies to the accounts as a whole rather than to individual components.In a further headache for the pro-IFRS European Commission and the IFRS Foundation, the ECON motion also questions the IASB’s decision to require banks to recognise just 12-months’ worth of expected losses on their loan book in the new IFRS 9 standard.The motion expressly refers to “the lack of conceptual basis regarding the 12-month loss provisioning approach and the unsatisfactory provisions pertaining to long-term investment”.IPE reported in March that the chairman of the European Systemic Risk Board, Mario Draghi, conceded his board did not yet understand the financial-stability impact of IFRS 9.If the EU endorses the standard, it would apply to accounting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2018.The new standard would be used extensively by systemically vital banks and insurance companies as the basis for their financial-asset accounting.Finally, MEPs have also reiterated the Parliament’s long-standing demand for involvement “at an early stage when developing financial reporting standards in general and in the endorsement process in particular”.The call is a potential headache for the IFRS Foundation, which in recent years has struggled to convince the US Securities & Exchange Commission that it can fend off political pressure from Europe.In a final 2013 report on IFRS adoption, SEC staff argued: “Through various channels, the Staff received feedback from commenters that have expressed concerns the IASB’s objectivity could be undermined via outside political influence.”The SEC staff also cited the concerns of the US CFA Institute, which pointed to the need to “recognis[e] that global politics can diminish high-quality standards, and address how political pressures can be counterbalanced.” Members of the European Parliament are set to vote on a highly critical review of the performance of the International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation (IFRS).The Parliament’s Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee (ECON) approved a draft of the report at a sitting on 27 April.The motion will now go forward to a plenary sitting of the Parliament for a final vote.Speaking after the 27 April vote, Green Party MEP and leading IFRS critic Sven Giegold said: “The message of the MEPs is clear: We are not just letting others decide on new standards. The European Parliament needs to be included when new standards are negotiated.
The pensions industry has been cautioned not to offer a “knee-jerk” reaction to government proposals for the National Employment Savings Trust (NEST) to offer drawdown products, amid concerns the provider could distort the decumulation market. Reacting to a consultation on the future of the defined contribution (DC) scheme set-up in parallel with the rollout of the UK’s auto-enrolment reform, the pensions industry warned against allowing NEST to compete with, or replace, private sector providers.The largest master trust, the nearly £1.2bn (€1.4bn) People’s Pension, argued that the government “can’t have its cake and eat it”, with its director of policy Darren Philp insisting that, if NEST wished to compete with other drawdown providers, the cost should not be met by further drawing on its government loan, which at the end of March stood at £460m.“Given how the market has responded to the challenge of auto-enrolment,” Philp said, “it is far from clear why we should be using a heavily subsidised government-backed scheme to provide services and products the market is well-equipped to provide in its own right.” Morten Nilsson, chief executive of the £192m fellow master trust Now Pensions, warned that NEST’s entry into the decumulation market risked “significantly [distorting] competition in an already distorted market”.“Its role was to be a provider of last resort with the intention that it should complement, not compete or replace, private sector providers,” Nilsson added.NEST has been successful in attracting more than 3.3m members to date, reporting assets under management of £970m as of the beginning of June.While some of its costs are met through a 0.3% annual management charge, additional costs are met by drawing on the loan.Immature decumulation marketGregg McClymont, head of retirement savings at Aberdeen Asset Management, insisted the decumulation market remained “very immature” one year after the end of forced annuitisation and the UK’s pension freedom reforms.Responding to those critical of NEST’s potential entry into the decumulation market, which the Department for Work and Pensions said would only see it offer drawdown solutions to existing NEST members – thereby ruling out the provider’s directly competing with market participants at retirement – McGlymont said he was “very sensitive” to the arguments put forward.However, he also questioned how long it would take the industry to develop a drawdown product suited to NEST’s target market, with its stated goal of attracting largely lower-income earners less likely to be financially literate.“Given NEST’s track record in the accumulation space,” McGlymont said, “given the characteristics of the immature decumulation market, and given NEST’s need to serve its target market more widely, a knee-jerk reaction is probably not the right way to proceed.”In the wake of the pensions freedom reforms, NEST has been working within its current statutory framework, allowing those members wishing to access savings to take one or more lump-sum payments.In 2015, the scheme outlined how its future retirement offerings could evolve to blend deferred annuities and income drawdown – allowing for income certainty and members to benefit from future returns.McClymont, previously the Labour party’s opposition spokesman on pensions, praised NEST’s work on drawdown products.“This is a market crying out for some sort of innovation, and we’re all trying to provide it,” he said.“But, actually, it’s difficult because usually you respond to consumer demand in the market – and it’s unclear what the demand is.”The government consultation is set to close in late September.
The Dutch government has argued that a proposed European framework for personal pension products would be unnecessary.Responding to the European Commission’s plans to draw up rules for personal pension products – announced at EIOPA’s annual conference in Frankfurt last week – the Dutch government said the existing rules for insurers, banks and asset managers were sufficient.It argued that Brussels should instead focus its attention on boosting second-pillar arrangements in countries where such systems are under-developed.It also said it doubted Europeans would increase pensions savings under the Commission’s proposed framework. “If people are not saving enough, it is most likely due to the specific circumstances of EU member states,” it said.The Dutch government said its local second-pillar pensions market was working properly and pointed out that it was also open to foreign providers.The European Commission’s proposal is linked with a consultation first mooted by European supervisor EIOPA about a pan-European personal pensions product (PEPP) last year.At the time, the Dutch government said it failed to see any added value in such a product.In the Commission’s opinion, personal pension products (PPPs) could help to secure adequate replacement ratios as an addition to state and worker pensions.It argues that the single market could offer more choice of products and providers, and that it would allow workers to transfer their personal pension assets easily if they moved to another country.PPPs would also be an important building block of a Capital Markets Union, it said.
The European Commission has unveiled a set of common rules across the European Union (EU) to make corporate taxation fairer and to combat tax evasion and avoidance, setting the rules out in a directive entitled a ‘Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base’ (CCCTB).A previous version of the directive had been delayed since the EU’s last proposal on the issue in 2011.The implementation of the new rules has been arranged in two stages to commence on January 2019 and January 2021, respectively.The earlier date is for the “common base”, which covers how a company’s profit will be taxed, once various exemptions and deductions have been accounted for. The later date is for “consolidation” aspects.This is the process that will allow a group to add up all the profits and losses of its constituent companies to reach a net profit or loss for the entire EU. It will show how it should be taxed.The European Commission bills its new version of the CCCTB as a single set of EU-wide rules for businesses to calculate their tax bill, to relieve problems giving rise to double taxation and to close tax loopholes involving EU countries and non-EU jurisdictions.A basic principle of the package is that companies should pay their taxes where “their profits and value are generated”.Pierre Moscovici, commissioner for Economic and Financial Affairs, answering a question at the press launch, took pains to emphasise that the rules would have no effect on national corporate tax rates, as set by national governments.Questioned on the attitude of the UK, he indicated support as expressed during numerous meetings. Moscovici also indicated optimism of support across EU national governments as a whole.The European Commission, in an information sheet, states that national governments are now asking for a proposal to extend rules applied to illicit liaison “mismatches” to non-EU countries.It goes on to estimate that the CCCTB would reduce by 70% the amount by which profit-shifting for tax purposes would be eliminated under CCCTB rules.It also suggests EU companies could cut their overall compliance costs by 2.5%, noting that 28 different tax rule books “create red tape and high costs for cross-border companies”.The latest initiative is described as “bolstering” this summer’s anti-abuse measures under the EU’s Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive.This sets out “anti-abuse measures to block some of the most prevalent forms of base erosion and profit shifting”.On double taxation, the Commission cites the 900-odd double taxation disputes in the EU today that, combined, are estimated to be worth €10.5bn.This is somewhat higher than the €8bn estimate made recently by Valdis Dombrovskis, head of the EU’s Capital Markets Union programme. On dispute resolution for double taxation, the Commission finds that, at present, there is often no recourse for taxpayers when dispute mechanisms are applied improperly.In addition, the timeline for procedures can be unpredictable, it says.After implementation of the CCCTB, there would be an obligation to notify taxpayers and publish arbitration findings, the Commission states.
Dutch social affairs minister Wouter Koolmees is confident that employers and unions will soon agree proposals for a new pensions system, despite the fact that the government’s deadline of early April has expired.In a letter to the Netherlands’ parliament comprising an update of the status of the system reform plans, Koolmees said he expected advice soon “as during the past years, many elements have already been fleshed out and the urgency [of proposals] is undiminished”.However, large trade union FNV said it was less convinced that the social partners would produce a result in the near future.“We’ll see whether and when the debate will produce anything,” said Tuur Elzinga, the union’s trustee for pension matters. He emphasised that his organisation was fighting for “a decent pension for all”. Tuur Elzinga, FNVElzinga said that the union would continue its work to preserve the pensions system.One of the bottlenecks for progress on the reforms is the ongoing debate within the Social and Economic Council (SER) between employers and workers about a new pensions contract.Although the SER initially indicated that it favoured individual pensions accrual combined with a degree of risk-sharing, the FNV has increased its support for a continuation of collective pension arrangements.A new contract for pensions in real terms is now also on the negotiation table.The minister’s letter came at the request of Pieter Omtzigt, MP for the Christian Democrats party (CDA), who reminded Koolmees that the debate about pensions reform had been going on for eight years.The MP said he wondered what the minister’s optimism was based on, adding that he was disappointed about the social partners’ failure to meet multiple deadlines.Jetta Klijnsma, Koolmees’s predecessor, first asked for the SER’s advice on pension system reform four years ago.At the time, she said she wanted to know the SER’s opinion about the future of occupational pensions and the necessary transition route.
AP3, ACCESS, Mercer, PensionDanmark, Öhman Fonder, Unified Investors, HSBC GAM, Dahlgren & Partners, PBU, PKA, SVB, Green Finance Institute, Insticube, Aon, IC Select, Lincoln Pensions Mercer Schweiz – Dan Tonks has been appointed head of retirement services for Mercer’s business in Switzerland, a newly created role. Tonks was previously senior manager for pensions at KPMG, advising domestic and international clients, and before that worked in similar positions for KPMG in the UK and at consultancy group Barnett Waddingham. At Mercer Schweiz he will report to Lutz Krepper, chief operating officer and lead for “enabling services”. PensionDanmark – Lars Sandahl Sørensen, chief executive of the Confederation of Danish Industry, has been appointed as a new member of PensionDanmark’s two supervisory boards with effect from 15 August, replacing Karsten Dybvad. Dybvad left the role in December after being appointed chair of Danske Bank.Meanwhile, Lars Storr-Hansen – also a member of the supervisory boards for PensionDanmark and PensionDanmark Holding – has moved up to fill Dyvbad’s position as deputy chair. He is chief executive of the Danish Construction Association and a board member of the Danish pension fund for self-employed people, Pension for Selvstændige.Öhman Fonder – Jamal Abida Norling has been appointed by Swedish investment manager Öhman Fonder as its new chief executive, moving up from his current role as the firm’s CIO. Abida Norling, who has already started in the role, replaces Pablo Bernengo who is leaving to join Swedish state pension buffer fund AP3 in November.Abida Norling started at the Öhman Group when it bought DNB’s Swedish fund and asset management operations in 2016. He has worked in the investment industry for 20 years, including roles in asset allocation and alternative investments at AP1 and Aberdeen Asset Management.HSBC Global Asset Management – The €398bn asset manager has appointed Tina Radovic as global head of credit research. She joined the company in 2003 and has led the Paris-based credit research team for the past 10 years.In her new role, Radovic will be responsible for leading HSBC GAM’s global credit research platform and a 44-strong team, which supports the group’s $179bn (€161bn) fixed income offering.Pædagogernes Pension (PBU) – Uffe Jensen, the mayor of the Danish municipality of Odder, has become the new chairman of the supervisory board of Danish labour-market pension fund PBU. He replaces Claus Omann Jensen, who stepped down as chairman in May. Local municipal government organisation Kommunernes Landsforening (KL) and trade union BUPL, which jointly govern the pension fund, appointed Uffe Jensen as chair on 1 August.PKA AIP – PKA AIP, the alternative investment arm of Danish pension fund PKA, has appointed Jakob Karstensen as an associate in its private funds team. He previously worked for Danish investment firm Executive Capital within SME investments and fund management. Prior to this, Karstensen also worked for Nordea and Nordnet. SVB – Dutch social affairs minister Wouter Koolmees has appointed Diana Starmans as a member of the executive board of the Sociale Verzekeringsbank (SVB), the institute responsible for paying the Dutch state pension, AOW. Currently, Starmans is temporary chief executive of Groningen town council. She previously worked as director for policy advice and deputy CEO for Amsterdam’s city council.Unified Investors – The former head of tax and fund accounting at Denmark’s ATP, Mia Byrk, has joined Danish investor start-up Unified Investors as a partner. The company was founded by Kasper Mule Scott Struve, who left his role as director of private investments at Industriens Pension in January this year to start the business.In posts on LinkedIn, Struve said the company’s goal was to help institutional investors build exposure to private markets, while Byrk described her move to the new company as fulfilling her entrepreneurial desire. Byrk worked for ATP for the last seven years, including for the fund’s private equity arm for the first three. She has previously worked as financial controller for Danish property management company Ejendomsinvest.Green Finance Institute – Ben Caldecott has been appointed as a senior adviser to the chair and CEO of the UK’s Green Finance Institute. He is an associate professor at the University of Oxford and is the founding director of its Sustainable Finance Programme.The Green Finance Institute was launched in July with seed funding from two UK government departments and the City of London Corporation. Its CEO is Rhian-Mari Thomas and its chair is Sir Roger Gifford.Insticube – Former RobecoSAM head of institutional Rüdiger Zeppenfeld has joined data and analytics firm Insticube to lead its sales and relationship management efforts in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. According to Insticube – which is powered by IPE – Zeppenfeld has more than 22 years of “in-depth knowledge of asset management for institutional investors”. He has also worked for Berenberg Asset Management and State Street Global Advisors.Aon – Tony Baily is returning to the consultancy giant as a partner in its investment team after a four-year spell as client director with Cardano. Baily’s first period working with Aon lasted 23 years. His experience includes being a scheme actuary, a corporate pensions adviser and an investment consultant. In his new role at Aon he will focus on growing the firm’s fiduciary business. IC Select – The fiduciary management specialist has appointed John Paterson as a director, hiring him from investment and actuarial consultancy JLT Group. IC Select said his appointment followed a surge in demand for independent advice following the Competition and Markets Authority’s review into investment consultants and fiduciary managers.Lincoln Pensions – The UK covenant advice specialist has hired Nick Gibson as a director from PwC’s covenant advisory practice. According to Lincoln, Gibson “has advised schemes ranging in size from £10m to some of the largest in the UK, including many where the Pensions Regulator has been proactively involved. Prior to PwC, he spent three years at covenant advice group Gazelle Corporate Finance and has also worked for Begbies Traynor Group and EY.Dahlgren & Partners – The Swedish law firm, which specialises in occupational pensions, has hired Isabella Hugosson as a lawyer. She is returning to Dahlgren & Partners after working for the firm in 2015, joining from her most recent position at Swedish lawyers Kompass Advokat. Hugosson also previously worked for Swedish pension fund AMF specialising in insurance law. AP3 – Mattias Bylund (pictured) has left the Swedish first-pillar pension buffer fund to take up a position at the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority (ADIA). Bylund was most recently chief operating officer for investments at AP3.He held a number of senior positions at the SEK341bn (€31.7bn) fund during his 17-year spell, including chief financial officer and chief risk officer. At ADIA, Abu Dhabi’s sovereign wealth fund, Bylund will be head of risk and operations for external equities. ACCESS – The pooling company for 11 English local authority pension schemes has named Kevin McDonald as interim director. He was previously pension director at the Essex Pension Fund, one of ACCESS’ client funds and the host authority of the pool.In his new role, McDonald will be responsible for managing the development and implementation of the ACCESS pool’s strategy, as well as maintaining effective communication with funds and “key partners”.The Essex Pension Fund has promoted Jody Evans to interim director.The 11 ACCESS funds have £45bn (€49bn) in assets under management between them, £22bn of which is “under pooled governance” by ACCESS.