• Home
  • About
  • Subscribe
  • LATIF
  • Conferences
  • Dashboard
  • Edit My Profile
  • Log In
  • Logout
  • Register
  • Edit this post

Room 151

  • 151 BRIEF

    What's New?

  • Slough welcomes commitment that Office for Local Government ‘will not be a burden’

    June 30, 2022

  • Homes England agrees strategic partnership with two authorities

    June 29, 2022

  • Soaring inflation and pay pressures to add £3.6bn to council budgets

    June 28, 2022

  • Underfunded social care reforms could ‘exacerbate workforce pressures’

    June 27, 2022

  • Nottingham City Council leader labels proposed intervention as ‘disappointing’

    June 27, 2022

  • Government preparing to intervene in Nottingham City Council

    June 23, 2022

  • Treasury
  • Technical
  • Funding
  • Resources
  • LGPS
  • Development
  • 151 News
  • Blogs
    • David Green
    • Agent 151
    • Dan Bates
    • Richard Harbord
    • Stephen Sheen
    • James Bevan
    • Steve Bishop
    • Cllr John Clancy
    • David Crum
    • Graham Liddell
    • Ian O’Donnell
    • Jackie Shute
  • Interviews
  • Briefs

LGPS fees caught between complexity and controversy

0
  • by Colin Marrs
  • in LGPS
  • — 1 Apr, 2015

IMG_0620_2As another financial year begins, the debate about the state of the Local Government Pension Scheme is raging more fiercely than ever. During March, a BBC Radio 4 item and a trade press article poured opprobrium on the scheme’s management. And this week, an article in the Financial Times focused on the issue of fees paid to external investment managers.

The article claimed a large number of the 89 funds making up the LGPS “may be squandering millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money on excessive fees to fund managers”. But a number of senior sector professionals have told Room151 that the picture is more complex than the story suggests.

The FT article, as well as the Radio 4 investigation, was based on figures compiled by John Clancy, a Birmingham City councillor. Clancy’s figures showed that while some councils are spending as little as 0.1% of their total asset size on fund management, others are spending up to 1.14%. Clancy told the paper that any spend above 0.4% was “absolutely dreadful”.

The £765m Hammersmith and Fulham pension fund, for example, spent £4.9m on investment costs last year and achieved a 6.4% return. The £775m Enfield pension fund spent just £1.3m on investment costs for an identical return.

But Graham Muir, partner and head of public sector with pensions adviser Barnett Waddingham, insists the figures, taken in isolation, reveal little. Firstly, he says, councils might link performance payments to returns made over a number of years. “All they have done with these figures is look at one particular year, which is nonsense,” he says.

In addition, he points out that performance cannot be inferred by looking at the net return percentage. “Most funds won’t have the same strategy – a figure of 6.4% could be well above a benchmark set for the manager or it could be well below, which would affect the amount of fees paid.”

Pension adviser Hymans Robertson worked with benchmarking company CEM on a report produced last year for the Department of Communities and Government into the future structure of the LGPS. The report examined data for 18 funds with assets of £38bn – selected to represent the average make-up and size of funds across the scheme – and compared it to a global peer group of 21 funds ranging from £25bn and £45bn in assets.

The results appear to contradict the claim that funds are paying excessive fees to external managers. On average, fees for LGPS funds made up 0.575% of asset values, compared to a global benchmark of 0.546%. Linda Selman, partner at Hymans, says: “On the face of it, they were paying just a tiny bit more than their peers.”

And when CEM delved into the reasons for the disparity, they revealed a number of LGPS funds were using a fund-of-funds arrangement, which saw fees paid to a top-level manager on top of individual fees for the underlying funds. Selman says: “This is more expensive but is one of the few ways LGPS schemes – which are relatively small compared to global funds – can diversify.”

In addition, Selman says, different funds have accounted differently for different fees, making comparison difficult. She says: “Some using fund-of-funds arrangements have only included the fee they paid the manager – not the layer of fees underneath – while others have included everything. Smaller funds often pool their assets and have not reported these fees,” she says.

These accounting variations are set to narrow, thanks to new Chartered Institute for Public Finance and Accountancy guidance which Selman says will come into effect this financial year. Until this happens, she says it is difficult to draw too many conclusions from comparing individual funds. And she adds: “The CIPFA guidance has been interpreted in different ways up until now, but the revisions should allow for greater transparency on fees.”

But to Mike Jensen, chief investment officer at Lancashire County Pension Fund the furore only serves to highlight a bigger issue – whether councils should be paying external consultants fees at all. Although he admits it might be more difficult for smaller funds to break away, he says: “The question for me is why aren’t councils creating in-house teams to manage funds? It is more efficient and cheaper.”

Share

You may also like...

  • LGPS annual reports: there must be a better way 10th Feb, 2022
  • The outlook for equity markets: The Bull and Bear Case 15th Dec, 2021
  • Fears that members are ‘opting out of LGPS over cost-of-living crisis’ 14th Jun, 2022
  • Insights and inspiration from LGPS leaders past and present 10th May, 2022

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

  • 151 BRIEFS – WHAT’s NEW?

    • Homes England agrees strategic partnership with two authorities
    • Soaring inflation and pay pressures to add £3.6bn to council budgets
    • Underfunded social care reforms could ‘exacerbate workforce pressures’
    • Nottingham City Council leader labels proposed intervention as ‘disappointing’
    • Government preparing to intervene in Nottingham City Council
  • Room151’s LGPS Roundtables

    Biodiversity
    Valuations & Risk
    LGPS Women

  • Room151’s LGPS Roundtables

    Biodiversity
    LGPS Women
    Valuations & Risk
  • Latest tweets

    Room151 2 hours ago

    Hillier confirmed as keynote speaker for LATIF/FDs’ Summit: Dame Meg Hillier, chair of the Public Accounts Committee, has been confirmed as a keynote speaker for Room151’s combined Local Authority Treasurers Investment Forum (LATIF) and FDs Summit. The… dlvr.it/ST70F7 pic.twitter.com/hxV676Iley

    Room151 2 hours ago

    Councils’ funding at risk due to ‘undercounting’ in census data: Population estimates in London and Manchester may have been significantly underestimated in the 2021 census potentially threatening government funding for frontline services in these… dlvr.it/ST707J pic.twitter.com/VncIyaXa01

    Room151 2 days ago

    Gove at LGA: councils to receive two-year financial settlement: Michael Gove has announced that councils will receive a two-year financial settlement from next year to provide authorities with “financial certainty” and allow them to plan ahead. The… dlvr.it/ST0kSV pic.twitter.com/wxL3UM4sGO

    Room151 2 days ago

    LGPS valuations: the digital journey: Rob Bilton explains how technology is helping to deliver one of the most complex data exercises in the world of public sector pensions. The 2022 valuations for LGPS funds in[...] dlvr.it/ST0kMq pic.twitter.com/VxjSPC2Uvo

    Room151 6 days ago

    Conrad Hall: ‘more sophisticated’ regulation needed for local government: The chair of the CIPFA/LASAAC Code Board has questioned the sophistication of financial regulation in local government and the continuing focus of the Department for Levelling Up,… dlvr.it/SSnPBV pic.twitter.com/G5d7JCWF8c

    Room151 1 week ago

    Slough Council approves plans to restructure finance department: Slough Borough Council has approved plans to restructure its finance department to enhance capacity and capability and to address a “significant weakness” in the function. The local… dlvr.it/SSf8DG pic.twitter.com/l5lmyHmkBg

  • Register to become a Room151 user

  • Previous story Trafford council lends to Lancashire cricket club after bank rejection
  • Next story News Roundup: Southwark slams minister, audit company launches, housing loan for Durham, Lancashire crowd sources loans

© Copyright 2022 Room 151. Typegrid Theme by WPBandit.

0 shares