Agenda item
Feedback from the Chair on CIPFA Pensions Board Seminar
To receive a verbal report from the Chair of the Pensions Board.
Minutes:
The Chair reported to the Board the matters discussed at a recent CIPFA one day seminar to consider the progress of pensions boards since their inception.
The following matters of concern and interest were noted:
- Insurance for Board Members
- it was noted that:
- The legal position regarding board indemnity was unclear; however there should be indemnity for Board members when discharging the duties for which they were appointed. The Board noted that council insurances indemnified Pension Committee members but did not generally provide the same for Pensions Boards and suggested that a representation on this matter should be made to the Regulator and that the matter also be referred to the Council’s Insurance Team. The Treasury and Investment Manager agreed that an enquiry would also be made with the Council’s insurer. The LGPA made clear that there was a need for indemnification.
- The Board discussed whether insurance could be provided via funds set aside for the work of the Pension Board and were advised that Boards were not permitted to self-insure.
- The Divisional Director’s Support Officer advised that it was necessary to clarify what areas the indemnifications covered. Clarification would be sought and a report back be made.
- Issues - Scheme Governance Survey
- The Pensions Regulator presented an update on a number of issues which featured in the Scheme Governance Survey; these broadly related to record keeping and risk management. The Regulator recommended that Boards monitor these areas in particular. Having considered the matter, the Board agreed that this duty should be highlighted to the Pension Committee and to officers.
- DCLG – Scheme Advisory Board
- An actuarial report on the Fair deal and Treasury cost cap was delayed until spring 2018.
- Governance of Pooled Investments
(CIV)
- There was concern around governance of these bodies and hoe Pension Boards could undertake this. The Chair advised that the Boards concerns on this matter should continue to be voiced. Additionally he advised that he has written to the Pension Committee in this regard and the Board will continue to monitor this matter until how governance would be delivered was made clear.
- The Board noted
- that a Government Review, of CIVs was imminent
- the Board of the London CIV would comprise a nominated Councillor from each participating authority.. These appointments, once confirmed, would be communicated to the Board.
- two authorities had withdrawn from the London CIV to conflict of interests
- the Treasury and Investment Manager would verify and inform the Board if work has started
- LGPS Complaints - the Regulator advised that the number of complaints upheld is very small in comparison to scale of LGPS. Complaints received have not at this time required referral onward to the ombudsman. It was noted that a stage one complaint was outstanding this time which would be externally checked.
- Cyber Security
- A new regulation, GDRP, places responsibility on data controller and had legal consequences. The Pensions Administration Manger (G Bruce) was working on compliance presently and would report back to the Board.
- Implications of the regulations also included more requirements on member consent (it may be necessary to change forms and update statements and consider information has been upheld).
- Cost Transparency Code for Asset
Managers
- The Chair of the Scheme Advisory Board advised that only seven managers had signed up to the code and asked that Pensions Boards should asking their Investment Committees to ensure that all asset managers have been asked to sign up. The TH Pension Board Chair recommended that the Board support this approach and ask for confirmation of whether or not the TH Pension Fund Asset Managers had signed the Code. The Board was informed that London CIV is leading in this area and has applied this principle to listed assets. Two managers have signed the Code, however it was noted that it might be difficult for Private Equity/ Infrastructure Managers to sign up. Notwithstanding the limitations, asset managers should be encouraged to support an ethical approach. The Board then agreed to monitor how this action progressed.
- Concurrent Pensions Board and Investment Committee cycles - it was noted that Tower Hamlets already operated such arrangements. These were important to ensure that there was balanced oversight of on administration and performance of funds.
- Future Seminars - The Chair noted that seminar had been well attended and should be open to all. He encourage all Board Members to attend the next seminar which would be held in London on 6th November 2017.
RESOLVED
That the presentation and actions requested be noted.
Supporting documents: