Mortier (Dpam): 'For companies, sustainability remains a strategic issue'

Please.

From a regulatory point of view, the ultimate responsibility for the quality and accuracy of the data provided by providers falls entirely on the asset manager, an uncommon circumstance.

A question on weapons. How do you assess the EU Commission's decision to allow sustainable funds to invest in nuclear weapons? What will Dpam do?

This is a politically difficult issue. For Dpam, nuclear and unconventional weapons are completely excluded from all investment strategies, in accordance with relevant international regulatory frameworks, including the Ottawa Convention. We invest in defence through 'mainstream', traditional funds, but not with those that have the sustainable label. There is also regulatory confusion. On the one hand we are asked to finance Defence, on the other hand the Sfdr (the Sustainable Finance Transparency Regulation, ed) requires minimum social safeguards and indicators on negative human rights impacts. How do you reconcile all this?

Many funds have renounced the ESG label, saying that sustainability was just a fad.

Maybe Esg was a fad for some, but we at Dpam have always done what we said. We have not had to change the name of our funds because we have always been transparent about our objectives, exclusions and engagement.