• The opinion of the
    Accountability Council

The Accountability Council (AC) has the authority to evaluate the Board’s performance, policy decisions, and policy implementation. A positive evaluation depends on whether interests were considered equally. The Council is made up of six members.

Changes on Board

Theo van den Elshout stood down from the Board of the Accountability Council. The vacant position was filled by Rolf van Kouwen on the employer’s recommendation. The pensioners on the Accountability Council stood down on January 1, 2019 in accordance with the retirement rota. Both Jan Coenen and Olaf Tant ended their membership of the Accountability Council at the end of 2018. Jan Hellings and Ed van Lamoen stood for the vacant positions. No other candidates came forward. Both were therefore nominated by the Accountability Council and appointed by the Board as members of the Accountability Council with effect from January 1, 2019.


Composition as of May 2019
From left to right: Ben Jonker, Olaf Tant (Deputy Chairman), Jan Coenen (Chairman), Gerard Tummers, John van Moorsel. Not on this photo: Theo Van den Elshout

The Accountability Council believes the Board is solid and made its policy decisions while aiming to consider the interests of all members as far as possible. The fund acted in accordance with legislation and regulations, the articles of association and the fund's regulations. A lot of money circulates in the fund. The Board is aware of its fiduciary responsibility. It does not hesitate to make investments if there is room for improvement in the fund's administration. This does not alter the fact that the Board also takes a critical approach to costs: duplication and excessive complexity are avoided wherever possible.


In its general evaluation,
the Accountability Council was positive about
the Board's policy decisions in 2018.


In 2018, the Board worked intensively on completing its strategic agenda. Central to this was the Service Level Agreement with DSM Pension Services (DPS). The efforts made in this regard by both the Board and the administrator cannot be overstated. The main focus was on concluding a contract that guarantees continuity while offering parties the opportunity to reach different agreements in the event of new legislation and regulations or changing market conditions. To serve the interests of the members, the Board has succeeded in continuing its collaboration with DPS, which has been judged positively. The complete evaluation by the Accountability Council and the response from SPF's Board to the evaluation can be read in SPF's annual report.