Agenda and minutes

The Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Alistair Bastin and Cllr Roger Cox.

There were no declarations of interest.

There were no requests to submit a petition or to make an address.

To approve the public part of the minutes of the meeting held on 21 October 2016 (LPB5) and to receive information arising from them.

The public part of the Minutes of the meeting held on 21 October were approved and signed as a correct record.

The Committee is RECOMMENDED that the public be excluded for the duration of item 7 in the Agenda since it is likely that if they were present during this item there would be disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended) and specified in relation to the respective item in the Agenda and since it is considered that, in all the circumstances of each case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

THE REPORT RELATING TO THE EXEMPT ITEM HAS NOT BEEN MADE PUBLIC AND SHOULD BE REGARDED AS STRICTLY PRIVATE TO MEMBERS OF THE BOARD AND OFFICERS ENTITLED TO RECEIVE IT.

RESOLVED:             that the public be excluded for the duration of item 7 in the Agenda since it is likely that if they were present during those items there would be disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended) and specified in relation to the respective items in the Agenda and since it is considered that, in all the circumstances of each case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

PUBLIC SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS FOLLOWING THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE PRESS AND PUBLIC

To approve the exempt part of the Local Pension Board Minutes of the meeting held on 21 October 2016 (LPB7) and to receive information arising from them.

ITEMS FOLLOWING THE RE-ADMISSION OF THE PRESS AND PUBLIC

The public was excluded during this item because its discussion in public was likely to lead to the disclosure to members of the public present of information in the following prescribed category:

3.         Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information) and since it is considered that, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information, in that disclosure could distort the proper process of each of the 10 Committees negotiating the final proposal. It is intended that once all Committees have agreed the final proposal for submission to Government, the final proposal will become a public document. Disclosure would also prejudice the commercial position of the individual pension funds, and future negotiations with Fund Managers.

The exempt part of the Local Pension Board Minutes of the meeting held on 21 October 2016 were approved and signed as a correct record.

In relation to exempt Minute 36/16, the Board AGREED to accept the decision of the Pension Fund Committee that the next review of the Council’s AVC Scheme be carried out independently and that a comparison of AVC Schemes of Brunel Scheme partners be carried out.

ITEMS FOLLOWING THE RE-ADMISSION OF THE PRESS AND PUBLIC

This report (LPB8) follows up on the discussion by the Board at their last meeting in respect of concerns regarding employer data, and the issuance of pension information to scheme members including annual benefit statements. The report covers the specific issues raised by the Board, as well as the subsequent report to the Pension Fund Committee.

The Board is invited to note the latest position on employer management and to offer any further comments.  As the full performance model is developed following completion of the 2016 Valuation, further reports will be brought to the Board for their information and consideration.

The Board considered a report (LPB8) which covered the specific issues raised by this Board during its discussion at the last meeting in respect of concerns regarding employer data, and the issuance of pension information to scheme members, including annual benefit statements.

At its last meeting, the Board raised concerns about the lack of information on how many scheme members were missing more than just their last annual benefit statement, and suggested options to improve communication with such members going forward. Other proposals were raised to improve the overall performance in this area. As requested, an update on the position was before the Board (LPB8), including details of the subsequent discussion and decisions of the Pension Fund Committee when it discussed this issue at its December meeting. The Officer report to the Committee was also included as an Annex to this report (LPB8).

Mr Collins reported that since the initial report to the Regulator, 1,298 more statements had been issued, the majority of which were to Oxford City Council staff. This left 8,197 outstanding, or 42% of the active membership. Within this outstanding figure were 3 significant groups of employee, the Academies (3,187), Oxford Brookes (2,310) and the balance on Oxfordshire County Council (989).

 During discussion the Board noted that:

·         most authorities had struggled after the scheme changes in 2014 to issue their statements but there was a need to ascertain the reasons why Oxfordshire’s statistics appeared worse than other authorities;

·         noted that this year’s breach had been reported to the Regulator and a further response was awaited;

·         Brookes had employed more staff to rectify the problems with their data, and, following recent discussions, a clear way forward had been determined;

·         The issues with Academies had been compounded  by a recent change in their payroll provider. Errors on final pay data had recently been reported impacting 2,700 staff, with a further 470 statements delayed due to queries on CARE data;

·         just under 1,000 queries were waiting for a response from Oxfordshire County Council; and

·         of the 9,459 people who had not yet received a statement on 14 November for the 2015/16 year, 2,572 had not received a statement for the previous year, representing 13.3% of active members. 655 members (3%) were missing more than 2 statements whilst 193 had not received one since annual benefit statements had been introduced in 2005. This group presented the biggest challenge in trying to resolve, given the passage of time since the initial query.

Mr Collins then explained what measures had been taken to address the above concerns:

(a)  the Committee had agreed to increase staffing in OCC Pensions by 5.81fte staff. This would enable a team to be established specifically to work with employers, to ensure earlier intervention where accurate data was not received regularly on a timely basis;

(b)  officers were reviewing the way data was asked for from employers, seeking a more standard, automated approach which would assist in a better flow;

(c)   more training and support was to be given  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8/17

Attached at LPB9 is the latest risk register as presented to the Pension Fund Committee on 2 December 2016.

The Board is invited to review the report and to offer any comments to the Committee.

The Board were asked to review the latest risk register report as presented to the Pension Fund Committee on 2 December 2016 and to offer any comments to the Committee.

Mr Collins, in his introduction, reported that the Committee had received assurance that Pensions staff would be relocated again in April. He added that the recent office move had not been ideal, but to date no staff had been lost as a consequence.

The Board discussed the risks associated with the loss of informed members of the Committee following the election. It was felt that there was a need to give careful thought to the Members’ Induction Programme following the election. Plans were in place for a whole day’s training for new members of the Committee. The Chairman of the Board stated that Gloucestershire was also working up similar training for after the election and that he provided training for the Gloucestershire Pension Fund once a year. He offered to open up some of the latter sessions to a wider audience. He also flagged up a new risk which was that of data security in light of recent hacking incidents nationally, and asking if there was a need for further review. Mr Collins agreed to take the issue to the next Pension Fund Committee. He also undertook to bring back the findings from a report from Oxfordshire’s Internal Audit on computer security.

The Board will be given an oral report on the latest position in respect of the Full Business Case, the next stages in the project and any other key issues arising.

Mr Collins gave an oral update on the latest position in respect of the Full Business Case for the Brunel Pension Partnership Ltd, as agreed at the 2 December 2016 meeting of the Pension Fund Committee, and the next stages of the project. He reported the following:

·         The full business case was proceeding through all the 10 Pension Fund Committees and Councils. It had been signed off by all 10 Committees and by 6 of the 10 Councils;

·         A meeting had taken place with Marcus Jones MP which had been attended by two members of the Brunel Oversight Board and officers. The Minister had given his approval to the direction the Brunel Group was travelling. Currently five pools had received letters of approval and three were outstanding;

·         He circulated the advertisement from the Brunel Pension Partnership for an independent Chair and independent non-executive directors, with a view to the Chair being in post from March/April 2017. There was also the need for a Chief Executive to be appointed early. Specialist recruitment consultants had been appointed to support the process;

·         Work was ongoing within a newly formed Legal Sub-Group to draw up the formal legal documentation required for the new company; and

·         The Board continued to meet monthly, with fortnightly officer meetings and weekly telephone calls.

The Board congratulated Mr Collins and the other officers for all the work undertaken to date on this project and for their professionalism. The Board also thanked Mr Collins for the quality of his presentations to the Board and to Committee.

Mr Collins further reported that the joint engagement days (with Buckinghamshire and Gloucestershire) had been very well received and these would continue. The next big issue would be addressed in March/April when the new Chair/Chief Executive would hopefully be in place, and the legal documentation drafted.

Mr Collins was asked if he had any concerns with regard to Brunel. He responded that he did not. At the outset Brunel had set like-minded principles which continued to guide all work streams. All worked to the common cause and when issues arose they were discussed and answers were found. A further benefit was that there was a significant amount of collaboration amongst participants in the group. He emphasised that when Brunel had been fully established, a function of this Board would be to challenge Brunel to ensure that it was operating appropriately for Oxfordshire’s funds. Collaboration work would continue to be strong and there would be more time to provide a focus on employer issues.

This is the standard item to be included at the end of the Agenda to consider what issues or items the Board wishes to report back to scheme members.

All issues had been discussed in previous items.

A member of the Board asked if there were any forums where Boards could discuss similar issues of concern.

Mr Collins reported that Gregory Ley would be sending out information on particular training sessions.