Agenda item

(1)          Mr Vickers introduced a report which set out proposals for the establishment of a Pensions Board, under the Public Services Pension Act 2013.  The report also requested the Committee to consider the status of the co-optees on the Superannuation Fund Committee and whether they wished to make any amendments to them.

(2)          Members discussed the draft consultation document setting out proposals for the establishment of a Pension Board.  The following points were made;

·         Mr Vickers emphasised that the Pension Board will not have a scrutiny function, it’s role was to fulfil the requirements of the Pensions Regulator. 

·         In relation to the proposal that the term of office of members of the Pension Board be four years with no provision for substitutes, it was suggested that this could be problematic for the Trade Union representative in particular.

·         Mr Vickers confirmed that the Pensions Board would have no remit to consider grievances in relation to the Local Government Pension Scheme, it was a regulatory board with a narrow remit set out in the legislation.

·         Mr Vickers undertook to clarify in the draft consultation document that travel expenses only were payable to members of the Pensions Board.

(3)          In relation to the co-optees on this Committee, Members discussed the three issues, i.e. the number of District Council co-optees and the method of appointing them, whether the representative from Medway Council should have voting rights and whether representation from Kent Active Retired Fellowship (KARF), the trade union and staff should continue or whether this was more appropriate for the Pension Board. 

(4)          Ms Fitch confirmed that it was for the Committee to consider whether it wished to continue to have three District Council co-optees on this Committee.  In light of the upcoming District Council elections in May 2015 it was timely to look at a more sustainable method of appointing these representatives, other than via the current 3 largest political groups across districts. 

(5)          Councillor Burden offered to seek the views of the Kent Leaders Group on the way in which the District Council representatives on this Committee should be appointed and whether there should continue to be three representatives.

(6)          In relation to the non-voting status of the Medway Council co-optee on the Committee, Councillor Wicks expressed the view that this was an inconsistency that needed be addressed at the first appropriate opportunity.

(7)          It was suggested that the matter of the co-optee membership on the Committee could wait and be addressed prior to the 2017 KCC elections. However, in view of the May 2015 District and Medway Council elections a number of members of the Committee considered that this matter needed to be addressed as soon as possible after the 2015 elections.

(8)       RESOLVED that:

(a)          the consultation document (Appendix 1 to the report) and the process for establishing the Pension Board as set out in paragraph 23 of the report be approved and that the results of the consultation be submitted to the meeting of this Committee on 20 March 2015 for endorsement prior to submission to County Council for approval on 21 May 2015; and

(b)          in relation to the District and Medway Councils co-opted members  of the Superannuation Fund Committee a report be submitted to this Committee at its meeting on 26 June 2015 and any recommendations to amend the co-optees on this Committee be submitted to the Selection and Member Services Committee for approval.