Nest refuses to reveal fund manager fees
Share
Nest has refused to release details of the fees charged by its investment fund managers owing to concerns that the disclosure would “prejudice the commercial interests” of the scheme.
Responding to a freedom of information request from Money Marketing, Fundweb’s sister publication, Nest concedes that releasing the information would improve transparency and accountability of its activities and the procurement decisions it takes.
However, it says revealing the fees would hamper negotiation of future fund management mandates. Nest says the decision was also influenced by the fact that fund manager charges will be paid for by scheme members rather than the taxpayer.
Nest says: “The disclosure of this information would also prejudice the commercial interests of the fund managers in question because charges pay-able by clients for fund management services are closely protected within the industry and disclosure would place fund managers working with the Nest Corporation at a significant commercial disadvantage.”
Rob Reid, managing director at Syndaxi Chartered Financial, says: “It is ironic, given the current discussion on the lack of full disclosure of charges, that we have a government-sponsored arrangement that does not want to tell us what the individual fund manager charges are.”
UBS, State Street Global Investors and BlackRock will manage the five investment mandates to be used by Nest’s default fund.
To receive more relevant articles like this one, why not sign up to our briefings and breaking alerts by clicking here and Follow @fundweb
Readers' comments (3)
Anonymous | 7 Apr 2011 4:53 pm
this is hypocrisy at it's worst. don't do as I do, just as I say
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 7 Apr 2011 5:11 pm
One of the funninest things I have heard in years.
'Nest says the decision was also influenced by the fact that fund manager charges will be paid for by scheme members rather than the taxpayer.'
Stunning! The UK is now officially more bent than Zimbabwe whilst claiming to be 'protecting consumers'. Gordon Brown would have been proud. The pensions industry is truly, totally stuffed.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Graham Cooper | 7 Apr 2011 5:26 pm
Seems to me that it is one rule for us and a further rule for them. This is big broth saying don’t do as I do as I tell you! Haven’t they heard of transparency?
Further proof, that Nest is not fit for purpose.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment