Recommendation on Divestment from Arms Manufacturing Companies (March 2010)
At its meeting on 15 March 2010, Council considered the report entitled: C1032 
(54kb) (the Report).
This Report was the outcome of Council's referral last year to the
Socially Responsible Investment Review Committee of the issue of
University investment in companies engaging in arms manufacturing, a
question that had been raised originally by students. The SRIRC
received and gave initial consideration to Council's referral at its
inaugural meeting on 26 May 2009 and continued its deliberations at its
meetings in Michaelmas Term 2009 and Hilary Term 2010. Minutes of these
meetings can be found on the SRIRC webpage.
Council thanked the SRIRC for the careful thought it had applied and the effort it had put in. However, Council deferred a decision on the recommendation of the Report, agreeing that before it could take a decision on the recommendation of the SRIRC, it should be apprised fully of the implications of accepting the recommendation. Council therefore referred the report to the Investment Committee for comment, liaising with OUEM as appropriate, focussing particularly on the financial ramifications and the practicalities of implementing the recommendation. In addition, agreeing that it would be desirable to have a consistency of approach as between its investment decisions, receipt of research funding and receipt of donations, Council also referred the report to the Research Committee for its views on the potential implications for the receipt of research funding, should the report's recommendation be accepted.
Council considered the matter further at its meeting on 21 June 2010:
Extract from the Vice-Chancellor's report on the meeting of Council held on 21 June 2010
Council also considered a further paper following the recommendation from the Socially Responsible Investment Review Committee that it should not invest in companies that engaged in the manufacture of weapons and munitions prohibited under Arms Control Treaties to which the UK is a signatory. Council had referred the SRIRC report to the Investment Committee for comment, asking it to focus particularly on the financial ramifications and the practicalities of implementing the recommendation. It had also referred the report to the University's Research Committee, for its views on the potential implications for the receipt of research funding, should the report's recommendations be accepted. During discussion it was emphasised that investment in such companies was actually very difficult to achieve as such a tiny minority of companies manufactured such weapons or munitions, and most were state-owned. Furthermore, it was very difficult to establish with certainty that an investment in such a company had been made because of the paucity of reliable information in this field. Noting the extent to which, as the Trustee body of the University, Council could take policy decisions that might have a detrimental effect on the investment return of the trust, and coupling this with the robust advice of the Investment Committee that, for pooled vehicles, the implementation of such a policy would have considerable financial ramifications, Council was clear that in applying the policy, it would have to distinguish between direct investments and investments in pooled vehicles. It therefore agreed that it should pursue the implementation of the recommendation with respect to direct investments, subject to providing the necessary notification to external investors. Where there were pooled investment vehicles, it was agreed that it should implement a policy of monitoring investment in such companies. The difficulties of obtaining reliable information were acknowledged and OUEM Ltd was asked to use its best endeavours to obtain such information.