• 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

Survey reveals “pernicious” lack of trust in London CIV among stakeholders

0
  • by Colin Marrs
  • in 151 News · LGPS
  • — 24 Jan, 2018

LGPS pooling body the London CIV (LCIV) must reset its relationship with member funds to reverse a “pernicious” lack of trust, according to a hard-hitting official review.

Room151 has seen a copy of an independent governance review produced for the CIV in November, which said that some funds are not fully engaged “and seem to be growing increasingly disgruntled” with the body.

The emergence of the critical review comes after chief investment officer Julian Pendock became the latest senior figure to leave the LCIV.

The governance report was produced by financial adviser Willis Towers Watson, which surveyed more than 50 pension officers, committee chairs and/or members of the Pensions CIV Sectoral Joint Committee, and also London borough treasurers.

It said of the survey: “The level of trust between different stakeholders and LCIV was a clear issue, and a lack of trust has a pernicious effect spreading across many facets of the pooling challenge.

“We note that trust takes significant time and effort to foster, but also that shifting people from a position of mistrust is an exponentially greater challenge than developing trust from a ‘neutral’ starting point.”

The survey scores indicated “a pervasive sense of dissatisfaction with the status quo” according to the report authors.

Of 28 questions posed, just nine registered an average response score above the neutral level of 50 (with zero the lowest and 100 the highest ranking possible).

The lowest scores from the survey showed a ranking of just 29 in favour of the statement: “I believe that London CIV should have more authority in relation to manager selection than they currently do”.

The second lowest level of support (36) came for the statement: “There are adequate review procedures, relating to key decisions taken by London CIV, in place for stakeholders.”

The governance review pointed out that the CIV is in an “invidious position” because it was “attempting to deliver on a complex and challenging task, under-resourced and underfunded…”.

It also placed its identification of challenges in the context of the CIV’s shift from a voluntary initiative to a compulsory pooling system as mandated by government.

“It is far from clear that the inherited structures and governance model under the former voluntary circumstances remain appropriate in the new environment,” the report said.

Additionally, the authors also said they did not observe any significant lack of collective will among those surveyed for the CIV to be successful.

However, they said that in order for the CIV to succeed, “stakeholders must be willing to accept trade-offs, and perhaps those trade-offs may be more significant than current appetites.”

The authors added: “It is important that we note here that while LCIV must assume responsibility for the genesis of many of the issues identified — and the potential solutions to them — it does not bear this responsibility alone.”

Recommendations included in the report included a call for the CIV to adopt a more narrowly-defined statement of purpose.

The report also said that the number of full committee meetings (with representatives of all 32 boroughs) should be reduced and replaced by greater sub-committee working.

In addition, an independent resourcing and cost model review should be carried out, it said.

“To move forward effectively,” the report said, “LCIV and all stakeholders need to look for an opportunity to reset their relationship to facilitate better working relationships and engagement.

“This review and its recommendations hopefully offers such a reset point.”

Warwick Lightfoot, vice chair of the investment committee at Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, told Room151 that he believed the current governance of the CIV was a “clumsy arrangement”.

He said: “Trust seems a bit precious as a word. I don’t think it is a matter of trust — it is about being satisfied about transparency, accountability and control.”

He added: “When representatives from the CIV came to talk to us and described their procedures I haven’t come away more confident about what they were doing.

“I had reservations over custody of assets, the selection of fund managers and the amount they are being paid.

“I like the idea of a London-wide vehicle you can opt into — that is pretty harmless.

“However, when it is mandatory you lose control of decisions and the ability to hold those making the decisions to account.”

Mark Hyde Harrison, interim chief executive of London CIV, said: “London CIV has achieved a great deal since it was established two and a half years ago and we continue to work hard alongside London boroughs to build on our success and respond to the challenges we are facing.

“We are actively taking on board the findings of our governance review and are developing recommendations with our colleagues in the boroughs that we will put to London borough leaders in March.

“London was a pioneer in establishing pooled arrangements and it makes sense to take stock now on how best to deliver the original vision for the CIV in the light of the wider changes that are happening in local authority pension fund management.”

Vice president of the Society of London Treasurers (SLT) Gerald Armaroth, strategic director of resources at the London Borough of Sutton, told Room151: “The governance review has highlighted some important issues which SLT and elected members are working through with the CIV board to ensure that the CIV remains on course to deliver clear strategic and operational objectives for the short, medium and longer term benefit to LGPS funds in London and its scheme members.”

Separately, at a meeting on Tuesday, Westminster City Council was due to abandon plans for a joint procurement with the London CIV for a fixed income manager.
A report to the council’s pension fund committee said that its existing contract with fund manager Insight Investment Management would expire before the CIV could appoint a new external manager.

In addition, it said the CIV’s “global fixed income mandate was not congruent with the pension fund committee’s preference for a long duration buy and maintain style mandate”.
As a result, the council was set to renew its contract with Insight.

Get the LGPS Quarterly Briefing

Share

You may also like...

  • Understanding climate risks in short-dated bonds 24th Sep, 2021
  • Abolition of section 106 agreements ‘threat to local prioritisation’ 5th May, 2022
  • Avoiding the ‘flaw of averages’ in your LGPS actuarial valuation 5th Oct, 2021
  • Going beyond the standard metrics for climate change 2nd Mar, 2021

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 days 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 days 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 3 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 3 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 1 week 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 Helen Randall: Learning the lessons of Carillion
  • Next story Q&A: Mark Mansley of Brunel on long-term investing and building a pool

© Copyright 2022 Room 151. Typegrid Theme by WPBandit.

0 shares