MORE than 100 Royal Bank of Scotland investors have thrown their support behind plans for a shareholder committee meant to address corporate governance issues at the UK lender.
ShareSoc, the UK’s individual shareholder society, is set to deliver documents relating to the proposed resolution to RBS’s London offices this afternoon in the hope it will be put to a shareholder vote at the bank’s annual general meeting in May 2018.
The group said current methods of shareholder engagement — including “cosy chats with selected shareholders behind closed doors” — does not work for the broad shareholder base, adding that it is unclear whether investors are receiving the same information or if it is being “spun”.
ShareSoc chairman Mark Northway said: “Shareholders, including individuals, deserve a new approach; one with greater involvement and more effective input from them as ultimate owners. RBS, given its incredibly poor track record and consequent taxpayer support, should now be leading from the front in governance matters.”
It is the second time the shareholder society has tried to establish a bespoke committee at RBS, after the bank rejected a similar proposal earlier this year. ShareSoc claims RBS had been “hiding behind tenuous, expensive legal arguments” in order to block its creation.
The group’s director and campaign manager, Cliff Weight, said: “This year, we are hoping RBS will engage with us and work constructively in developing an improved corporate governance framework.
“Since ShareSoc first engaged with RBS in December 2016, there have been several positive developments which we recognise and applaud, but there remains much more to be done on shareholder democracy”.
RBS said it was aware the group was running another campaign to launch a shareholder committee.
“Whilst it is of course the role of the company directors to represent shareholders, we will review any proposal that is submitted and make our response clear in due course,” the lender said in a statement.
The shareholder group has condemned RBS for a raft of historic failings that included a culture of “excessive risk, short-termism, greed and irresponsibility”, as well as excessive bonuses and executive pay that has “impacted the brand”.
The lender was also criticised for treating customers unfairly, mis-selling mortgage-backed securities in the US as well as payment protection insurance (PPI) in the UK, its Libor-fixing scandal, and the ongoing controversy over how its Global Restructuring Group (GRG) treated small business customers.
That is on top of concerns over top-level diversity, with only four women included in its “pale, male and stale” 14-strong board, the shareholder group said.
ShareSoc claims an effective committee would increase transparency but not interfere with the day-to-day management of the company, and could be established on a “purely advisory basis” without any specific powers.
“It is unlikely that the cases of Persimmon, BP, BHS and Sports Direct would have occurred if such a committee had existed at those companies,” the shareholder group said.
“And the problems would surely have been resolved quicker if each had had a shareholder committee.”
RBS said: “We will further enhance our focus on strengthening the voice of employees and other non-shareholder interests.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here