Agendas, Meetings and Minutes - Agenda item

Agenda item

Constitutional Report - Worcestershire Pension Fund Governance Arrangements (Agenda item 8)

To consider changes to the Worcestershire Pension Fund Governance Arrangements (Yellow pages).

Minutes:

The Council considered changes to the Worcestershire Pension Fund Governance Arrangements.

 

The recommendation in paragraph 1 on page 7 of the agenda papers was moved by Mr R M Banks and seconded by Mr A I Hardman.

 

An amendment was proposed by Mr L C R Mallett and seconded by Mr R C Lunn that the number of Worcestershire County Council voting representatives on the Investment Sub-Committee be increased from 3 to 5 members. 

 

In the ensuing debate, the following points were raised:

 

·         The problem with the make up of a relatively small sub-committee was that the absence of one or more members impacted on its decision-making capacity

·         As the Sub-Committee had become a formal meeting, there was merit in increasing the number of representatives including from an additional opposition Group.

 

The mover and seconder of the recommendation accepted the amendment that the number of Worcestershire County Council voting representatives on the Investment Sub-Committee be increased from 3 to 5 members in accordance with political balance, which then became the substantive motion.

 

The rationale was queried for reducing the number of the non-voting representatives from a relevant union from 2 members (on the previous Pension Investment Advisory Panel) to 1 member on the Investment Sub-Committee and for making the co-opted member non-voting, given the increased decision-making responsibility of the Sub-Committee. The Head of Legal and Democratic Service advised that it was a matter for Council but there was a distinction between employer representatives from the councils and union representatives.

 

An amendment to the substantive motion was moved by Mr L C R Mallett and seconded by Mr R C Lunn that there should be up to 2 co-opted employee representatives with voting rights on the Pension Investment Sub-Committee.

 

In the ensuing debate, the following points were raised:

 

·         Although voting was rarely necessary, the Sub-Committee would be making important decisions about current and former employee’s pension contributions and therefore it would be appropriate to have up to 2 co-opted employee representatives with voting rights on it

·         Although the employee representative on the Sub-Committee would be acting in an observer capacity, their views would still be reported to the Pensions Committee

·         The report was not clear as to whether the Sub-Committee had decision-making powers or acted in an advisory capacity to the Pensions Committee. It was also unclear as to whether the membership of the Sub-Committee would be politically balanced or based on knowledge and skills

·         The report indicated that the Sub-Committee would be a decision-making body and therefore it was important that the employers and employees worked in partnership for the benefit of pension fund members

·         The Chairman of the Pensions Committee indicated that the issue of co-option was a matter for the Committee to decide upon.

 

On being put to the vote, the amendment was lost.

 

On being put to the vote, the substantive motion was agreed by a strong majority.  

 

RESOLVED: that

 

a)   the creation of the Investment Sub-Committee (replacing the Pensions Investment Advisory Panel) be endorsed with the Terms of Reference for the Pensions Committee and Investment Sub-Committee as set out in Appendix 1 to the report subject to the number of Worcestershire County Council representatives increasing from 3 to 5; and

 

b)   The revised and updated Governance Policy Statement set out in Appendix 2 to the report be approved.

 

Supporting documents: