Investment strategy AT THE risk of playing the same old tune, we continue to be concerned at the fund’s investment strategy. We want to see a secure fund able to pay all our pensions during our own lives and those of our dependents. After all, the original buoyant state of the fund back in the 1990’s was based on the returns on investments made partly with the money that flowed in from our contributions while we were working. Although the assets of the scheme are separate from those of Unilever, the fund’s investment strategy has a significant effect on their value. It has a high-risk investment strategy which the company favours because it hopes good returns will reduce the contributions it needs to make. But this has a severe downside. If stock markets do badly and interest rates drop the value of these assets will fall, perhaps creating an even larger deficit. As already highlighted, this was £1.8 billion on March 31, 2009. Since then the FTSE 100 index has increased from around 3,900 points to 5,400 points so one would expect the deficit to have been reduced. However, the value of funds in UK shares does not paint a complete picture because investments are made in many different parts of the world. The cost of all the pensions is increasing due to increasing life expectancy, the possibility of increased inflation and falling credit spreads on corporate bonds. Altogether, this means the deficit could increase even further. The scheme’s surplus back in the 1990’s was used as the justification for Unilever giving the company and its employees a break from paying contributions. However, even though the deficit became so big that contributions were resumed and the company also has had to make additional payments as well, we calculate it is still at least £800 million in pocket from the move while we pensioners have seen little additional benefit. Instead, the money released by the contributions' holidays was used to bolster the company’s profits when it was performing badly and to improve dividends to shareholders as well as to meet various restructuring costs. Unfortunately, those responsible for making those decisions are no longer with the company. They are all retired and enjoying much better pensions than any of us!