Loading
The minutes are published. No summary has been written yet.
1.1 Apologies were received from Ian Reese.
2.1 Board Members confirmed the following personal declarations of interest: Board Member In Receipt of Pension Contributor Bob Campbell Self Steve Harford Self Sister Rhian Hayden Mother Self and sister Clive Rogers Self Meirion Rushworth Self Jane Waters Brother Self Anthea Wellington Self and husband Daughter John Wright Self and wife Daughter
3.1 The HoP updated that he would be looking to fill the Board vacancy over the summer. 3.2 The Pension Board agreed that the minutes were an accurate record of the meeting.
4.1 The HoP updated that in relation to the Governance Policy and Compliance Statement the work had been completed, it just needed circulating, which he would do as soon as possible. 4.2 The Pension Board agreed to note the Action Sheet.
5.1 The Pension Board considered the draft minutes of the Pensions Committee held on 5 June 2023. 5.2 The HoP provided a brief overview of the work going on in relation to item 6, the Investment Strategy Update, but would be providing a more detailed update at the next meeting. 5.3 Following questions from the Board, the HoP made the following points: • Councillors Alfie Best and Chris Tew had been nominated as new members of the Pensions Committee, which made it a full complement of six. • In relation to the Investment Strategy review process, the Capital Assumptions Modelling (CMA) commissioned by the Fund did not specifically take into account the potential of moving to a zero-carbon position. However, the risk of climate change was factored into the modelling undertaken as part of the triennial valuation exercise in 2022. Climate change and stranded asset risk remains an important consideration although not explicitly covered within the CMA modelling. Work was ongoing as part of the investment strategy review which would assist and hopefully reduce the impact over time. 5.4 The CLO left the meeting. 5.5 The Pension Board agreed to note the draft minutes.
6.1 The HoP introduced the item and welcomed the AM, who outlined the report. 6.2 Following a question from the Board, the AM responded that they did review the risk register of the Fund whilst conducting their audit. The two significant financial statement risks referenced within the report were the ones considered to carry the greatest risk of material misstatements and hence their specific focus as part of their audit work. 6.3 The Pension Board agreed to note the contents of the report.
7.1 The HoP presented his report by pulling out key points. Following, he responded to a question by saying that the introduction of ISA 315 as referenced by Audit Wales in the prior item would be considered as part of the report presented to Pensions Committee. The report presented to Board was kept concise, but could include information around ISA 315 and any other relevant accounting standards in future iterations. 7.2 The Pension Board agreed to note the contents of the report and commented as appropriate.
8.1 The HoP presented his report whilst referring to the appendices. Following questions from the Board, he made the following points: • There was no conflict of interest arising from the appointment of Robeco as one of the underlying investment managers within the Global Credit sub-fund of the WPP. Russell Investments had made this appointment independently of the WPP who appointed Robeco as voting and engagement provider in 2020. • Under the WPP Business Plan 2023-2026 item in the minutes on page 58 of the agenda pack and the suggested inclusion of effective climate risk mitigation, it was expected that this was more of an oversight rather than it purposefully not being incorporated. • In view of the Chancellor’s recent comments regarding pension reform, the long-awaited LGPS pooling consultation was issued with a response date of 2nd October 2023. The HoP confirmed that the Fund would respond, alongside the WPP who were also preparing a response as one of the eight LGPS pools. A copy of these responses would be shared with members in advance of the deadline and an informal discussion regarding some of the details would be arranged. • The Pension Board agreed that a session would be beneficial and so the HoP agreed to set this up to include the Pensions Committee as well. • In response to a question the HoP confirmed that the monthly pensioner payroll was around £10.5 million which can typically be met by the income received from scheme employee and employer contributions. The Fund remains cash flow positive but ad hoc costs such as retirement allowances, transfers in/out, death grants and refunds can influence the net position each month. The HoP confirmed that the Fund’s allocation to cash was operational rather than a source of investment although as interest rates have risen in recent times so has the Fund’s return on its short-term cash investments. • He was more than happy to provide an informal training session covering the details set out within the Fund’s Strategic Allocation table in appendix 4 of the report as part of broader investment strategy training that would be offered to the Pensions Committee before being asked to make decisions about the Investment Strategy. He was hoping to give an interim update in September with a final update in December, so it made sense to provide the training in-between. 8.2 The Pension Board agreed to note the contents of the report as well as the respective appendices.
9.1 The PM outlined the report and provided an update on the administrative services provided by the Pension Section and highlighted several areas of currently activity and development. 9.2 The PM provided the following updates: · An update on the number of telephone calls the fund received in the past three months broken down by team · An update on the member and employer training undertaken These sessions had been well received with some employers asking for Annual Training sessions to be held. 9.3 Following a question from the Board, the PM made the following points: · When trying to find out whether a contributor was still alive the Pension Fund utilise Tell Us Once, ATMOS, Annual Payslips and Club Vita. If any overpayments do occur, the Fund would try and collect this payment through contracting the next of kin or the bank. 9.4 The Pension Board agreed to note the contents of the report.
10.1 The HoP outlined the report and changes made within the Risk Register. Following, he responded to a question by saying that in relation to SR13 some members of the Pensions Committee had taken up the offer of an informal training session to assist them in their role. The HoP confirmed that he was content with the current level of risk and the controls and mitigations in place to manage them. 10.2 The Pension Board agreed to note the updated Risk Register.
11.1 The PM outlined the report and provided and update on training already undertaken by members of the Pension Board, for information and to aid consideration of future training requirements. 11.2 The PM asked Board members to contact her by the end of the week if they wanted to attend the Investment Cost Transparency training session. 11.3 The Pension Board agreed to note the training update provided in the report.
12.1 The date of the next meeting was noted. 12.2 The meeting ended at 11.25am.
13.1 The Pension Board agreed to the exclusion of press and public.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
The council hasn't recorded attendance for this meeting.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.