IFoA comes under fire for election delay

The Institute and Faculty of Actuaries (IFoA) has come under fire for suspending elections to its council for “operational reasons”.

In an open letter, actuary Nico Aspinall said: “I have been proposed as a candidate in the coming election and I am waiting to hear both whether I have been accepted as a candidate and when I can start campaigning formally for votes.”

Aspinall added: “It is deeply concerning that a democratic institution takes the step of suspending an election and publishes no reason for that suspension. I understand the CEO has the power to take the unusual step of suspending the AGM and election, but it must be the role of the elected members of council to hold that decision to account.”

In the same letter letter, Aspinall urged members of the IFoA council to probe the reasons why the election has been suspended, and to confirm a new date for the election – and Annual General Meeting – as soon as possible.

He concluded: “The electoral process must be at the heart of a properly constituted council able to exercise the powers granted to us in our royal charter. Suspension of the election is a suspension of our constitution.”

Matthew Edwards, an actuary at WTW, was among several other actuaries who echoed Aspinall’s concerns. “Speaking as another “prospective candidate in limbo”, I am astonished at the election suspension. The fact that ‘at best’ it appears to be a case of administrative / operational incompetence, and leaving to one side possible ‘at worst’ scenarios relating to democratic failure, is an appalling position, and explains why many actuaries feel exasperated by the workings (euphemism?) of the paid secretariat (our employees, to be clear). I hope council get things back on track.”

Members of the IFoA council were unable to expand upon the “operational reasons” the IFoA gave for the delay.

A spokesperson for the IFoA said: “The IFoA postponed its AGM and Presidential Address scheduled for Tuesday 27 June due to operational reasons. We will announce a new date as soon as possible and provide the required 60 day notice period. The ballot for new Council members will open 35 days ahead of the new AGM in accordance with our Constitution.”

IFoA votes for governance changes

Meanwhile, the IFoA has implemented a series of measures which it says will improve and modernise its governance.

Its existing management board will become a unitary board, with an independent chair; a role which the IFoA will seek to fill in due course.

The unitary board will comprise nine members: four independent non-executive directors (including the chair), four IFoA member non-executive directors (one of whom will be the president), and the CEO. All existing council and management board sub-committees will report to the unitary board.

The IFoA council will remain its ultimate decision-making body, but will delegate its oversight, strategy, planning and reporting responsibilities to the unitary board. Meanwhile, the council will focus on advocating for the IFoA’s membership, optimising IFoA membership and developing a long-term vision for the actuarial profession.

The IFoA president will also serve a two-year term, an extension of the existing one-year term. The first two-year president is expected to serve from June 2025-2027.

Matt Saker, IFoA president said: “I would like to thank the Governance Review’s steering committee for leading the extensive consultation process which sits behind these governance changes. Council has signalled clear support for the changes, decisively voting to commit to the new structure and processes. We can now move into the implementation stage with clear principles on the initial set-up and robust rules for the long-term success of this process.”

The changes will take place in the first half of 2024.

While welcoming the intention of the proposals, Aspinall responded: “We still don’t have a date for the AGM and election, so it’s not clear that the council spent time yesterday considering the suspension of the constitution or maybe didn’t have enough people on it who think that’s important enough compared to the governance changes.”