To receive any apologies for absence.

The meeting was held in a hybrid format with the Chair, and Pension Fund Officers meeting in-person at Minster Court, while other members attended virtually.

Before starting on the agenda, the Chair, Alan Cross, asked for confirmation from members that they were happy for him to continue to chair the Board for the municipal year of 2023-24. They agreed.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Alan Cross remain as Chair of Berkshire Pension Board for the municipal year of 2023-24

The Chair, Board members and officers introduced themselves.

Apologies were received from Jeff Ford, employee representative.

To receive any declarations of interest.

No declarations of interests were made.

To approve the Part I minutes of the meeting held on 13 March 2023.

The Chair commented that there were some typos in which he emailed to the clerk, Laurence Ellis, Democratic Services Officer, outside of the meeting.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the minutes of the meeting held on 13 March 2023 be approved as a correct record.

To appoint a substitute member as a full member of the Pension Board.

The Chair proposed that the Board to appoint Julian Curzon, previously a substitute member, as a full scheme employer representative member of the Board. The Board agreed.

AGREED UNANINMOUSLY: Julian Curzon to be appointed as a scheme employer representative on the Berkshire Pension Board.

The Chair informed that there was a member vacancy and the plan was to seek interest in the position when sending out a members’ newsletter in Autumn 2023 as well as some targeted communications towards one or two large employers, who had not previously provided Board members.

To note the update from Philip Boyton, Pension Administration Manager.

Philip Boyton, Deputy Head of Pension Fund Resources, informed that a written ministerial statement was published on 2^nd March 2023, stating that the Pensions Dashboards Programme would require additional time to deliver the connection of pension providers and pension schemes. This was due to the pensions industry needing to connect a wide range of IT systems to the Pension Dashboards digital architecture. Central Government had amended regulations relating to the Pensions Dashboards Programme to allow a more flexible approach, rather than a set timeline, to ensure a more effective result. The statutory connection deadline was 31^st October 2026. He also added that it was speculated that the Pensions Dashboards would go live on an earlier date.

When the Chair asked about the Pensions Dashboards going live in spite of connections not being completed, Philip Boyton replied that it would be the Berkshire Pension Fund which would complete the connection using scheme member data from its participating employers, and it could continue with its work. The Chair commented that for an individual with multiple pensions, their Dashboard would only be complete once the last employer had joined the programme.

On the McCloud Remedy, Philip Boyton reported that a supplementary consultation had been published from 30^th May to 30^th June 2023. Due to the scale and complexity of the McCloud Remedy, its effects would likely be felt for many years as well as there being a possibility of legal challenge to this rectification exercise.

Philip Boyton also reported that the national government’s consultation and rectification of age discrimination in the LGPS (Local Government Pension Scheme) had been positively received, with the supplementary issues being better aligned with the LGPS and therefore placing it in alignment with other public service pension schemes. This would extend protections to individual scheme members rather than a particular employment as well as reduce administrative burden.

Central Government had acknowledged these legal challenges in the latest consultation; therefore, the Government was working with the LGPS to reach outcomes which provided the best scheme member experience as possible.

Philip Boyton then reported that a report had been commissioned on Sharia Law compliance. The Scheme Advisory Board had received legal advice which stated that opinion could be given on whether the LGPS was consistent with anti-discrimination and public sector equality duties. He added it was necessary to acquire an expert in Islamic finance to provide evidence of a range of issues from an Islamic perspective. The Scheme Advisory Board had commissioned expert advice on this with Amina Associates, with a report expected in about three months.

The Chair asked Nikki Craig, Scheme Employer Representative (and Assistant Director of HR Corporate Projects and IT at RBWM), whether employers that would know the proportion of their employees would be interested in this. She replied that most employers request protected characteristic information from employees but there would also be a ‘prefer not to say’ option. Employers would use this data to ensure equity and prevent discrimination.

Philip Boyton  ...  view the full minutes text for item 418.

To note the report from Damien Pantling, Head of Pension Fund.

Damien Pantling, Head of Pension Fund, introduced the report which reviewed the risk register at every yearly quarter. From the review, 49 risks had been identified and some material changes had been noted since the last quarter. The decision by the Pension Fund Committee would be to approve the contents of the Risk Register, the mitigations around each risk and any changes since the last quarter.

To note the report from Damien Pantling, Head of Pension Fund.

Damien Pantling explained the appendices in the report. Appendix one was the training framework, ensuring decision makers (i.e., the Pension Fund Committee) had the tools, knowledge and skills to make decisions. Appendix two was the updated governance with some amendments to promote better transparency for stakeholders.

The Chair asked if all positions on the Advisory Panel had been filled. Damien Pantling replied that all positions apart from one had been filled, and that West Berkshire Authority had yet to forward their member.

When the Chair asked about training, Julian Curzon, Scheme Employer Representative, said he would go through the training again as some of the content was irrelevant to LGPS. Damien Pantling requested for the information relating to all pensions training so that it could be catalogued. Julian Curzon agreed to do so.

ACTION: Julian Curzon to forward details of his training to Damien Pantling.

Nikki Craig asked if her training on pension scams had been recorded. Phillip Boyton replied that he could check on this, but nevertheless asked for completed training to be forwarded to him so that it could be catalogued.

The Chair commented that the Board would have to come back to this item to check if the new Councillors had completed basic training. Damien Pantling informed that a training framework would be published, followed by the publication of training records.

To note the report from Philip Boyton, Pension Administration Manager.

Philip Boyton introduced the report. On Scheme Employer Key Performance Indicators (1.4 in the report), there were positive data results on the submission of data amongst the unitary authorities (with all recorded as 100%), with Academies/Schools not reaching the target. Philip Boyton mentioned that the Chair had been seeking resolutions to this. In addition, Philip Boyton stated that he had conversations with the Pensions Team’s Communication Manager and Assistant Technical Analyst to improve communications with scheme employers to encourage them to submit data to i-Connect.

After the Chair commented on getting employers to submit their data to i-Connect, Philip Boyton replied that they could understand which employers had not submitted their data and therefore focus on them.

Continuing with the report, Philip Boyton informed that no new employers were on-boarded to i-Connect in the last quarter, but some that had completed their year-end, such as the Pioneer Education Trust in the process of being onboarded to i-Connect.

On Stakeholder Feedback (1.7 of the report), on 18^th January 2023, some feedback was received on the aggregation of scheme member benefits moving away from Berkshire Pension Fund to another LGPS Pension Fund. He explained that there was a scheme member who had intended not to aggregate within 12 months of joining the other LGPS Pension Fund but had not told his new employer. As a result, the deferred benefits which were held by Berkshire Pension Fund were automatically aggregated over into the new LGPS Pension Fund. This had a detrimental impact on the scheme member’s benefits because they re-joined the scheme with the other LGPS Pension Fund on a lower final salary, and therefore, reducing their benefits value. The individual scheme member had asked the other LGPS Pension Fund to request the Berkshire Pension Fund to accept repayment of the interfund transfer it had paid. Phillip Boyton informed that Berkshire Pension Fund declined to accept the repayment as it had acted in accordance with the LGPS regulations.

In response to comments on the Chair on the issue, Philip Boyton stated that there was no standard which LGPS Pension Funds follow to provide their information; instead, each fund could do it in whatever way they wanted.

Nikki Craig asked how much communication to the scheme member had been enacted to remind them on the transfer to other LGPS Pension Fund. Philip Boyton replied that the responsibility of reminding scheme members of transfers rested with the other LGPS pension fund as the transfer was going out of the Berkshire Pension Fund. When asked by the Chair on the Berkshire Pension Fund’s communication with the scheme member, Philip Boyton replied that it would have been to provide them with the details of their deferred benefits when they left and their options around transfer. He added that Berkshire Pension Fund had a process of sending one reminder to the scheme member (when the transfer was into the Fund).

Damien Pantling highlighted a couple of changes to the report. In 1.1 (Scheme Membership), the Pension Fund  ...  view the full minutes text for item 421.

To note the report from Damien Pantling, Head of Pension Fund.

Damien Pantling gave the update for the first quarter of the financial year of 2023. Referring to appendix two, he informed that the Pension Fund had very strong ESG (environmental, social and governance) credentials whereby it had more Green (renewable energy generation, clean technology, and decarbonising activities) than brown investments (extraction, transportation, storage, supply, and generation of energy from fossil fuels) as well as a generally better ESG score than the index as a whole.

Regarding appendix one, Damien Pantling informed that the Pension Fund was required to consider climate risk relating to its ability to pay pensions in the future. The main focus was on transition and physical risk as a result of climate change. The conclusion from the report was positive whereby the Pension Fund would resilient enough in all scenarios based on tests and modelling by the Pension Fund’s Scheme Actuary.

Due the complexity of this, Damien Pantling informed that a training session had been arranged for Committee members at 1:00pm on 19^th June 2023.

The Chair asked about the risks listed in the report by Barnett Waddingham (BW) and their comparison to the Pension Fund’s perception of the risks. Damien Pantling replied that the Pension Fund had generally picked up the risks which were listed (employer covenant, investment, inflation, mortality, legislative, reputational and operational) albeit more condensed.  He suggested to incorporate the risks listed by BW into the Risk Register.

ACTION: Damien Pantling incorporate the risks listed from Barnett Waddingham into the Risk Register

When Chair asked about the projection graphs, Damien Pantling replied that BW used figures from the Bank of England to formulate the report and it did not necessarily reflect their thinking. He explained that the reason there was a peak in 2030 and then a decline was because the Pension Fund had a drastic shift in asset prices at that time.

The Chair then asked if there was a date for climate risk reporting, referring to the DLUHC consultation. Damien Pantling replied that the Pension Fund was still waiting on this, and it was expected to be implemented in 2024.

The Chair asked the Board for approval for the papers in the report to be forwarded to the Pension Fund Committee, to which it accepted.

To discuss any other items of business.

No additional business.

To consider passing the following resolution:

“That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting whilst discussion takes place on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1-7 of Part I of Schedule 12A of the Act.”

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting on the grounds that discussions involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1-7 of Part I of Schedule 12A of the Act.

To note the report from Damien Pantling, Head of Pension Fund.

To discuss any other Part II items of business.