Venue: Microsoft Teams.
Contact: Miss C Tuohy (0116 305 5483). Email: cat.tuohy@leics.gov.uk
Note: This meeting will follow training for Committee members at the original time of 9.30am.
No. | Item |
---|---|
Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held on 27 November 2020 were taken as read, confirmed and signed. |
|
Question Time. Minutes: The Chief Executive reported that no questions had been received under Standing Order 34. |
|
Questions asked by members under Standing Order 7(3) and 7(5). Minutes: The Chief Executive reported that no questions had been received under Standing Order 7(3) and 7(5). |
|
To advise of any other items which the Chairman has decided to take as urgent elsewhere on the agenda. Minutes: There were no urgent items for consideration. |
|
Declarations of interest in respect of items on the agenda. Minutes: The Chairman invited members who wished to do so to declare any interest in respect of items on the agenda for the meeting. Cllr. M. Graham and Mr. P. Osborne CC declared personal interests in reference to any discussion held on farming as part of the Annual Review of the Asset Strategy Structure related to their positions as landowners. |
|
Funding Strategy Statement - Employer Risks and Exits PDF 346 KB Additional documents: Minutes: The Committee
considered a report by the Director of Corporate Resources seeking approval to
consult on proposed changes to the Funding Strategy Statement following
regulation changes to employer risks and exits. A copy of the report, marked
‘Agenda Item 6’, is filed with these minutes. Arising from
the discussion the following points were noted:- i.
The
Fund was not minded to allow reviews of employer contributions outside of the
usual Fund valuation process. In exceptional cases where a Fund employer was
experiencing genuine financial difficulty however, the Fund would look to
review the contribution rate if it were to increase the chance of repayment.
The risk would first be considered alongside risk to other Fund employers, and
would be assessed to consider putting additional security in place. The Fund
would seek actuarial advice on all cases. ii.
When an
employer withdrew from the Fund, the Fund would provide all information to the
Actuary to allow them to assess the potential ongoing pension costs, including
spousal payments. The Actuary would then provide the Fund with the cessation
termination value, which the employer would pay to remove ties with the Fund. The Committee welcomed the proposals and acknowledged that
consultation would begin on 1st February 2021 for four weeks to
allow employers to review the proposals and feedback as part of the
consultation. RESOLVED:- a)
That the draft Funding Strategy Statement, in relation
to changes on employer risks and exits, be approved for consultation with
employers. b)
That a further report be submitted to the
Committee in the year setting out the outcome of the consultation and
submitting the final Funding Strategy Statement for approval.
|
|
Draft Responsible Investment Plan 2021. PDF 485 KB Additional documents:
Minutes: The
Committee considered a report of the Director of Corporate Resources which
sought approval for a Responsible Investment (RI) Plan 2021 which set out the
Fund’s approach to improving its management of responsible investment risks. A
copy of the report marked ‘Agenda Item7’ is filed with these minutes. Arising
from the discussion the following points were noted:- i)
The 2021 Responsible Investment Plan was a continuation of what
had been agreed within the 2020 Members were pleased that the Plan evidenced
the Fund’s commitment to continual improvement and oversight of RI on the Fund.
ii)
LGPS Central, in collaboration with partner funds, had agreed
four key stewardship themes, including ‘fair tax payment and tax transparency’.
Engagement looked to support policy initiatives regarding transparency and
voluntary country-level tax disclosure. Members were assured they would get a
chance to question LGPS Central on the matter at a future meeting. iii)
Members
were assured that the Fund’s approach to RI was to engage rather than divest in
relation to the Climate Risk Report. Members discussed the important role
farming had within Leicestershire and the benefits high quality farming had in
comparison to factory farming on the environment and the local economy. iv) As part of the Plan the Fund would produce a
Taskforce on Climate Financial Disclosure(TCFD)
in Quarter 1. The Committee were pleased to note that the Fund was ahead
of Government’s proposal to introduce compulsory disclosure of such information
and that the Fund continued to keep an eye on proposed parliamentary
legislation that would look to further influence how public and private pension
funds responded to climate change ahead of the 26th UN Climate
Change Conference of the Parties (COP26). Members
thanked officers for producing a comprehensive plan and looked forward to
receiving future reports indicated within the Plan. RESOLVED: That the Responsible Investment
Plan 2021 be approved |
|
Annual Review of the Asset Strategy and Structure. PDF 501 KB Additional documents:
Minutes: The
Committee considered a report of the Director of Corporate Resources which was
accompanied by appendices produced by the Fund’s Independent Investment Advisor
and Investment Consultants Hymans Robertson. The report recommended a small
number of changes to the Leicestershire Fund’s strategic investment benchmark
and portfolio structure. A copy of the report and appendices marked ‘8’ are
filed with these minutes. The Committee welcomed Emma McCallum and Andy Green from
Hymans Robertson (Hymans) to the meeting. Leicestershire Pension Fund targeted a 5.9% investment
return per annum. However, due to market conditions, in
particular low interest rates and credit spreads the Fund’s investments
were currently expected to earn 5.5% per annum. Members were assured that the
Fund’s 2019 valuation of the funding level and deficit calculation was based
upon an 80% likelihood of meetings the investment return, equivalent to 3.8%
per annum. This meant that the revised 5.5% assumption was still comfortably
ahead of the Fund’s target. Furthermore, falling inflation and the expected
move from RPI to CPI was also expected to result in a small improvement in the
funding level, however not materially. As a result, given current market
circumstances, Hymans recommended no significant changes to the Fund’s asset
strategy. Arising from the discussion the following points were noted:- i.
The
switch from RPI to CPI post 2030 meant it would be possible to hedge the
sensitivity of CPI pension increases with index-linked gilts, however,
index-linked gilts remained expensive. As a result the
Committee supported reduction of the strategic allocation to index-linked
gilts, with reallocation to manage the currency hedge programme managed by
Aegon. ii.
Hymans
assumed returns relative to expected CPI, assuming a 1% difference between
expected RPI and CPI, which was consistent with the assumption made by the
Fund’s Actuary in 2019. Overall the Fund and advisors did not believe the move
from RPI to CPI would overly impact on the value of liability for the Fund, or
assets with small holdings in index-linked gilts. iii.
The
Fund remained underweight in property, which was considered appropriate due to
current market conditions and illiquidity. It was evident that Covid-19 had
accelerated the transition away from the high-street in
regard to commercial property, and it was difficult to predict its
return with a 20% fall of its capital value, despite supermarkets strong
position. iv.
It was
recommended that the Fund look at alternative property investments which
covered purpose built rental accommodation blocks, as such property had proved
most resilient during the crisis. The diversification away from commercial
property holdings was considered positive by the Committee and it was agreed
that there needed to be a focus on climate friendly sustainable properties. The
Fund would consider such diversification via either LGPS Central or existing
managers as opportunity arose. v.
It was
recommended that the Fund consider an allocation to Adams Street Partners
secondaries fund. This was considered more suitable than Aberdeen Standard
secondaries due to its earlier stage of the programme, which would result in
more throughput for the Fund. Secondly, Adams Street would look at specific
holdings that they were already aware of and hold bigger assets in a small
number of funds which would provide better visibility of what was being
invested in. vi. Hymans had considered different allocations per region for currency hedging. On balance it was felt the difference between strategic and longer-term analysis was not worth the complexity in the long term. Furthermore, Aegon’s mandate allowed the manager to implement its judgement regarding weighting, for example as at end of December it had increased weighting to 60% rather than 50% on the dollar, due to consideration of ... view the full minutes text for item 8. |
|
Date of the Next Meeting. The next meeting of the Committee is scheduled to take place on 26 February 2021 at 9.30am. |
|
Any other items which the Chairman has decided to take as urgent. Minutes: The Committee considered this matter, the Chairman having decided that it was of an urgent nature… |