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

Room 151

  • 151 BRIEF

    What's New?

  • London CIV appoints Dean Bowden as CEO

    August 18, 2022

  • Coventry secures over £115m of funding to decarbonise transport system

    August 18, 2022

  • Bexley Pension Fund appoints responsible investment consultant

    August 17, 2022

  • Leeds’ £120m levelling up bids offers ‘transformational change’

    August 16, 2022

  • Social care workforce crisis ‘requires government intervention’

    August 15, 2022

  • Consultation opens on future of IFRS 9 statutory override

    August 12, 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

The Pensions Regulator has spoken: LGPS is ‘high risk’ for governance and admin

0
  • by Guest
  • in LGPS
  • — 22 Oct, 2019

A report has found that LGPS has failed to show the same rate of improvement in governance and administration as other public services schemes.

Given the new “clearer, quicker and tougher” approach of the Pensions Regulator, it is perhaps understandable why the announcement last year that the LGPS was a “high risk cohort” was greeted by some scheme stakeholders with a certain amount of unease and trepidation.

By way of background, LGPS scheme managers, along with those in other public service pension schemes, are required by the regulator to complete an annual governance and administration survey. The conclusion reached by the regulator is that the performance of the LGPS had plateaued and was not showing the same rate of improvement in governance and administration as other public service schemes.

Key risks

Despite the long-held view from many within the scheme that it is imprudent to compare a locally administered, multi-employer scheme like the LGPS with other centrally administered, single employer schemes in the public sector, the regulator was resolute in wanting to better understand the approach taken by LGPS scheme managers to a number of key risks.

With that in mind, the Regulator took the decision to engage with ten LGPS funds across the UK between October 2018 and July 2019.

The findings from the engagement with the ten LGPS scheme managers were published by the regulator on the 19th September.

Informal soundings taken from the regulator’s team during the engagement process had suggested that the intended outcome would be largely positive and constructive.

There are many elements of the report where this is the case, however, there are other instances where the report does not shy away from citing key risk areas where administration and governance in individual cases has found to be wanting against the standards set out in Code of Practice 14.

In these cases, the report helpfully makes reference to examples elsewhere in the scheme where such risks have been identified and mitigated.

Four improvements

The report’s executive summary identifies four key improvement areas. Firstly, key processes and procedures are not being documented with the risk that effective administration is put at risk when key staff leave. There is also a concern that scheme managers are too reliant on controls put in place by the parent local authority, for example, on cyber-risk policies.

Secondly, engagement with some local pension boards is less than ideal and some boards are meeting too infrequently and relying too much on summary papers rather than full documents.

Thirdly, scheme managers need to be more vigilant when it comes to protecting members from potential fraud and scams.

Finally, the report identifies considerable variation in the approaches taken by scheme managers when dealing with the risks surrounding scheme employers, such as receiving contributions and employer insolvency.

The main body of the report goes on to examine how LGPS scheme managers stack up against key elements of Code of Practice 14, for example, on record keeping, internal controls, good administration, member communication, internal dispute resolution procedure, local pension boards, employers and contributions, cyber security and internal fraud.

The regulator is keen to point out that the report is not an evaluation of any fund’s operation as a whole, nor is it to be considered as regulatory assurance or an endorsement of individual funds. The message appears to be that across the ten funds, there are examples where practice fell short of the prescribed standards of governance and administration and others where it has either been met or exceeded.

The report certainly offers a comprehensive range of practical help and guidance to assist scheme managers who judge themselves to be falling short of the standards of governance and administration covered by Code of Practice 14 and is therefore to be welcomed.

Local pension boards should also be encouraged to familiarise themselves with the findings of the report given their clear role to ensure that their scheme manager is compliant with Code of Practice 14 and other regulatory requirements.

Lessons

The next step for the scheme in England and Wales will be to prepare a detailed paper for consideration by the Scheme Advisory Board when it next meets on the 6th November.

There may be certain aspects of the report that the board may wish to question or to seek further explanation from the Regulator, but it is expected that much of the discussion will focus on the lessons to be learnt from the report and the extent to which there is a read-across to the work the Board is doing to improve the administration and governance of the scheme in England and Wales under the auspices of the Good Governance project.

Bob Holloway, is pensions secretary at the LGPS Scheme Advisory Board. These are his personal views.

Share

You may also like...

  • Valuations 2022: what might it means for investment strategy? 15th Dec, 2021
  • The net-zero challenge for LGPS funds 7th Apr, 2022
  • Should LGPS divest from fossil fuel assets? 26th Apr, 2021
  • Recovery position: withholding tax and the LGPS 18th Aug, 2022

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

  • 151 BRIEFS – WHAT’s NEW?

    • London CIV appoints Dean Bowden as CEO
    • Coventry secures over £115m of funding to decarbonise transport system
    • Bexley Pension Fund appoints responsible investment consultant
    • Leeds’ £120m levelling up bids offers ‘transformational change’
    • Social care workforce crisis ‘requires government intervention’
  • Room151’s LGPS Roundtables

    Biodiversity
    Valuations & Risk
    LGPS Women

  • Room151’s LGPS Roundtables

    Biodiversity
    LGPS Women
    Valuations & Risk
  • Latest tweets

    Room151 10 hours ago

    Liverpool faces further government intervention as commissioners find ‘whole-council failure’: The levelling up secretary has announced that he is “minded to” expand intervention at Liverpool City Council by transferring the authority’s financial… dlvr.it/SWvgGc pic.twitter.com/cB7YeHZ9lE

    Room151 1 day ago

    Recovery position: withholding tax and the LGPS: Partner Content: Paul Sprenger from WTax talks to Room151 about how Local Government Pension Scheme funds could be missing out on millions of pounds of withholding tax recovery opportunities.… dlvr.it/SWsTfQ pic.twitter.com/z6aVMcaqHe

    Room151 2 days ago

    Treasurer societies favour permanent extension to IFRS 9 statutory override: Two treasurer society presidents have indicated their preference for the current five-year IFRS 9 statutory override to be made permanent following the government’s latest… dlvr.it/SWr3G4 pic.twitter.com/MGf9M5zC8Q

    Room151 3 days ago

    Luton Borough Council faces ‘grave’ £10m overspend: Luton Borough Council faces a £10m overspend in its 2022/23 budget which poses a “serious risk” to the authority’s financial sustainability. A report by Dev Gopal, director of finance, revenues[...] dlvr.it/SWmynD pic.twitter.com/ETDd7sQA48

    Room151 3 days ago

    Luton Borough Council faces ‘grave’ £10m overspend: Luton Borough Council faces a £10m overspend in its 2022/23 budget which poses a “serious risk” to the authority’s financial sustainability. room151.co.uk/funding/luton-… pic.twitter.com/XvyTZckW6m

    Room151 1 week ago

    LATIF/FDs’ Summit ‘on course to be biggest yet’: Room151’s flagship event – the Local Authority Treasurers Investment Forum (LATIF) and FDs’ Summit – is on course to be the biggest yet, with more than 200 delegates expected. Combining[...] dlvr.it/SWSDrL pic.twitter.com/f8FXzcAdWB

    Room151 1 week ago

    ‘Local government treated worse than any other part of public sector’: Clive Betts, chair of the Levelling Up, Housing and Communities Committee, talks to Mike Thatcher about lack of progress on levelling up, pork-barrel politics and why local government… dlvr.it/SWRk1L pic.twitter.com/Jpw0BsOsy3

    Room151 1 week ago

    Which LGPS pools and funds are attending the LGPS Investment Forum on Nov 2 & the LGPS Private Markets Forum on Nov 1st? Answer here: lnkd.in/eDHU8tuy pic.twitter.com/D3gd63Rh7F

    Room151 1 week ago

    LGPS and levelling up: nothing to fear but fear itself: There have been a number of objections to government plans for LGPS funds to invest 5% of their assets in local projects. But George Graham says these objections can be[...] dlvr.it/SWL7vt pic.twitter.com/ebwBEkZTy4

  • Register to become a Room151 user

  • Previous story 2019 LGPS valuations: The good, the bad and the ugly
  • Next story Chris Bilsland: Priorities of an NED inside LGPS

© Copyright 2022 Room 151. Typegrid Theme by WPBandit.

0 shares