John Brace | A blog about Wirral Council, Wirral Council's councillors & officers

Pension Committee 27/6/2011 – Part 3 – Banking Contract, Local Government Pension Scheme Reform

The officer introduced the next report on the banking contract as for noting as it had already been approved by Wirral Council’s Cabinet. The EU regulator had insisted that RBS divest some of its branches which it was doing to Santander. Wirral Council and the Merseyside Pension Fund therefore had to come up with interim … Continue reading “Pension Committee 27/6/2011 – Part 3 – Banking Contract, Local Government Pension Scheme Reform”

The officer introduced the next report on the banking contract as for noting as it had already been approved by Wirral Council’s Cabinet. The EU regulator had insisted that RBS divest some of its branches which it was doing to Santander. Wirral Council and the Merseyside Pension Fund therefore had to come up with interim arrangements as well as an agreement for tender. The agreement would extend the existing contract to the 31st March 2013. The Director of Finance would extend the contract and switch it to another bank if necessary.

The next report was on Local Government Pension Scheme Reform which the officer said was a “customary report”. He referred those present to paragraph 4.1 in reference to the latest information and the high level negotiations going on about the future of public sector pension between the Treasury and the trade unions. Neither DCLG (Department for Communities and Local Government) or the Local Authority Employers organisation was involved in these negotiations, however unfunded public sector schemes such as the NHS pension scheme were also included in these negotiations.

The officer felt there was a concern that LGPS (Local Government Pension Scheme) needs were not properly catered for. Discussions had not reached a final position and the difficulties of strikes were affecting some local authorities. The content of the trade union discussions was outlined at 4.4/4.5. New schemes were based on career average rather than final salary. It was unknown what the proposed level of benefits and accrued rights would be. The level of replacement income would reduce as pay increases. For example at £11000 it would be 80% replacement rate but over £58000 fall to as low as 50%. Other recommendations affecting the contribution rates were outlined in 4.16 to 4.26.

Pension Committee 27/6/2011 – Part 2 – Audit Fee, Bank Signatories, Internal Dispute Resolution Procedure, Management of Private Equity

The officer said the audit fees were for noting. There was a fixed element and a variable element, as well as a one-off charge of £1400 to make sure the Pension Fund had been successful at transferring investment balances from the old accounting system to the new one.

The total estimated audit fee was £54,065. The Chair and the committee agreed to note the report.

The committee then considered a report regarding the Internal Dispute Resolution Procedure, the officer said following a personnel change there were changes to the names that needed to be made. The Chair thanked them for the report and the change was agreed.

The committee received a report on the management of private equity, an officer mentioned Capital Dynamics and the terms and conditions in the appendix relating to the management of the portfolio. The exempt part related to confidential business matters. Section four had the assessment as set out in the letter, there were long standing private equity investments and it was important it was monitored. Section 4.4 set on the reliance upon the valuation of the private equity portfolio and the review of the contractual arrangements. The officer asked committee members to agree to the report and the appendix (starting at page 173). The report was agreed.

Pension Committee 27/6/2011 – Part 1 Introductions, Declarations of Interest, election of Vice-Chair, Local Government Chronicle Investment Conference (Newport)

The agenda for tonight’s Pension Committee meeting is here.

The Chair said the sound equipment wasn’t working and welcomed people to the first meeting of 2011/2012. He asked those present to introduce themselves. After introductions he asked for declarations of interest. Cllr George Davies declared that his wife was a member of the Fund and that he chaired a Merseyside Board. He also asked if he needed to declare an interest every time or whether it could be recorded and him not needing to do so.

The Chair said he had to declare personal or prejudicial interests in relation to the pension committee agenda.

The minutes of the previous meeting were accepted.

There were two nominations for Vice-Chair, Cllr Cherry Povall and Cllr Ann McLachlan. The vote on Cllr Ann McLachlan was held first. There were five votes for (Cllr Ann McLachlan forgot to vote, but tried to after the votes had been counted), five votes against. The Chair had a casting vote and voted against. Therefore Cllr Cherry Povall was elected as Vice-Chair.

Item 4 was about the Local Government Chronicle Investment Conference in Newport. The Chair asked people if they were going. Cllr Harney said he wasn’t able to go but sending people was valuable. The Chair said he was willing. Cllr McLachlan said she was not available. Cllr Jones asked about the spare place. Cllr Harry Smith said he had “got things to do”. Cllr McLachlan suggested those on the committee were consulted by email so they could consult their diaries, it was agreed it would be delegated to officers.

Planning Committee – 21/6/2011 – Part 12 – APP/11/ 00065 – Townfield Close, Claughton – Demolition of an existing petrol filling station and erection of Class A1 retail unit

Cllr Kelly said the first was regarding no servicing provision contrary to highway safety. The second reason was that the proposal was unneighbourly and would lead to the closure of the Post Office. Cllr Realey seconded this. The Chair asked the legal officer for advice. He said the implications regarding an appeal being successful would lead to a forensic examination and costs awarded [to the applicant and agent] if it hadn’t been scrutinised properly. Cllr Kelly said he would make the decision on its merits rather than what costs might be, unless the solicitor could guarantee costs would be awarded against Wirral Council. The Chair said he noted the wording and how eloquently Cllr Kelly had spoken out. Cheryl Barry said regarding R07C/R08D did Cllr Kelly want to insert loss of local Post Office and insert and local residents? Cllr Kelly said he wanted to widen it to local community. Cllr Kenny said he had a concern regarding highway safety because the proximity of the primary school was relevant to these issues. The Chair said the officers had said no and asked Cheryl to read it out. She said for two reasons it was being refused, the first being that the local planning authority finds it contrary to highway safety as there was no provision made regarding servicing needs. The second was that the proposal resulted in unneighbourly development and the local of the local Post Office as well as leading to a detriment in the amenities of the local community. This was seconded by Cllr Realey. There were six votes for refusal (including Cllr Kelly, Cllr Roberts and Cllr Boult). There were four votes against refusal. So the application was refused.

The Chair asked for a break for a few minutes.

Planning Committee – 21/6/2011 – Part 11 – APP/11/ 00065 – Townfield Close, Claughton – Demolition of an existing petrol filling station and erection of Class A1 retail unit

The Chair said a Co-op had been developed in Newton in West Kirby. At the time they thought the Post Office less than 150 yards away would close down but it was still operating and viable. He said it was a tenuous argument. Cheryl Barry said they would have to clarify evidence at appeal. She said the evidence was so clear and they would have to come to a conclusion regarding whether the application met the test. She was not satisfied with the evidence that had been submitted.

The Chair apologised at the amount of time taken over this application. Cllr Mitchell said in reference to the last comments, in Eastham there had been a Tesco next to a Spar and a Post Office put there two years ago. However Eastham was still vibrant, he had to make sure the information was correct. As members of the planning committee they had to make the decisions the right way. It was hard but in his ward they had allowed things to fall to pieces, it was a hard decision.

The Chair asked Cllr Kelly for his recommendation for refusal. Cllr Kelly said the first reason but was looking for officer’s assistance for further reasons. Not all reasons were required at once. The Chair replied that he’d like all reasons together, so that the committee could decide on any reasons for refusal and vote. Cllr Kelly said he would stick with two and only one needed to be upheld at appeal in order to be succesful for the inspector to rule in Wirral Council’s favour.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: