Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED: The minutes from the last meeting on 10 September 2025, were reviewed and approved with a noted commitment to provide further detail on the accounting standards.
RESOLVED: The Committee approved the Fund’s Annual Report for 2024/25 including the Statement of Accounts, considered the Audit of Accounts Reports, and approved the final Letter of Representation.
RESOLVED: The Committee agreed the proposed Strategic Asset Allocation as a basis for consultation with the Fund’s Employers as part of the Funding Strategy Statement (FSS) and agreed the next steps.
RESOLVED: The Committee: a) Approved the proposed key actuarial assumptions and funding parameters in paragraph 1.05 and noted the proposed key actuarial assumptions in paragraph 1.12 of the report. b) Approved the draft FSS with the addition of a specific question to employers as to whether they prefer a 103%, 105%, or 108% funding target incorporating the sustainability reserve. c) The Committee delegated the refinement and finalisation of the draft FSS to the Head of Clwyd Pension Fund, as part of the formal consultation with employers, having regard to the advice of the Fund Actuary.
RESOLVED: The Committee agreed the next steps as set out in the report.
RESOLVED: a) The Committee considered the update and provided comments, b) The Committee agreed that the delegated responsibility to approve the final response to MHCLG’s Access and Protections consultation is jointly provided to the Pensions Administration Manager and Head of Clwyd Pension Fund, subject to the stipulation that the Fund will not support the increase in the normal minimum pension age, and noting that Committee and Board members will be asked to share any views on the draft which will be circulated in advance of submission.
RESOLVED: The Committee considered and noted the update.
RESOLVED: The Committee considered and noted the report and provided comments and questions.
RESOLVED: The Committee noted the report.
RESOLVED: The Committee noted the upcoming Committee dates.
The Chairman invited attendees to declare any potential conflicts of interest that they may have in relation to Clwyd Pension Fund (“the Fund”), other than those already recorded in the Fund’s register. Cllr Ibbotson asked to draw attention to his declarations in light of reviewing the investment strategy. Cllr Wedlake confirmed personal unprejudicial interest as a member of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: The minutes from the last meeting on 10 September 2025, were reviewed and approved with a noted commitment to provide further detail on the accounting standards.
Cllr Ibbotson noted on page 10 of the agenda pack that it was offered to provide more information on the accounting standards if needed. He felt that there was a clear commitment at the meeting to provide this information and requested this be made clear in approving these minutes. RESOLVED: The minutes from the last meeting on 10 September 2025, were reviewed and approved with a noted commitment to provide further detail on the accounting standards.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: The Committee approved the Fund’s Annual Report for 2024/25 including the Statement of Accounts, considered the Audit of Accounts Reports, and approved the final Letter of Representation.
Mr Bateman introduced this item. He explained that since the draft Annual Report and Accounts were considered at the September meeting, Audit Wales have now concluded their audit and there have been some amendments of the notes to the Accounts, none of which affect the outcome of the audit. Robert Gore of Audit Wales wished to thank Mr Bateman and the rest of the Clwyd Pension Fund team for their hard work and support in providing the order of evidence for the purpose of the audit and their engagement through the process. Mr Gore took the Committee through the Audit Report including the: · Proposed Unqualified Audit Opinion · Audit findings · Summary of corrections made · Audit Risks and outcomes · Letter of Representation Mr Ferguson thanked officers and Audit Wales for achieving this position and within statutory deadline. He said that in an organisation of this size and complexity, amendments are always expected, and it is pleasing that all amendments have been applied in the final version. Based on the report and assurances, he recommended to the Committee the approval of the Annual Report and Accounts for signature by the Auditor General. Cllr Ibbotson commented that at the previous meeting there was an extensive discussion on the Annual report where additional information was requested which has yet to be provided, and he therefore expressed that he would be voting against the recommendation. The officers of the Fund highlighted that efforts had been made to contact Cllr Ibbotson to enable his questions to be answered and any additional training he wished for to be provided. It was suggested that a further conversation was held after this meeting to discuss his concerns. RESOLVED: The Committee approved the Fund’s Annual Report for 2024/25 including the Statement of Accounts, considered the Audit of Accounts Reports, and approved the final Letter of Representation.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: The Committee agreed the proposed Strategic Asset Allocation as a basis for consultation with the Fund’s Employers as part of the Funding Strategy Statement (FSS) and agreed the next steps.
Mr Turner referred to the recommended investment strategy which is to form part of the Funding Strategy Statement (FSS). Changes to the strategic asset allocation have been proposed to align with expected changes to LGPS regulations, including the termination of the Tactical Asset Allocation (TAA) portfolio and reallocation of those funds into the existing Multi-Asset Credit and Index-Linked Gilts allocations, and a new allocation to Investment Grade Credit to be implemented through the WPP Sterling Credit Fund. These changes were recommended with the aims of maintaining return, reducing risk and maximising the efficiency of the portfolio. Mr Turner reminded members that the climate metrics of the TAA portfolio had been reduced substantially in recent years. Whilst a small net increase is expected as a result of the wider strategic asset allocation changes, there remains an overall trend of reducing climate metrics over the 3-to-4-year period. Cllr Ibbotson said he believed that the next steps outlined are sensible under the circumstances and had no objection to them. He felt that the TAA portfolio has overall been good for the Fund but noted it wouldn’t be practical to continue with it in light of the reforms to the LGPS announced by the UK Government. He stated that he has concerns about the potential for reduced diversification and return sources within the investment strategy. Mr Hibbert agreed with Cllr Ibbotson’s comments and stated his disappointment that the government’s pooling agenda is a barrier to implementing the Fund’s ambitions. RESOLVED: The Committee agreed the proposed Strategic Asset Allocation as a basis for consultation with the Fund’s Employers as part of the Funding Strategy Statement (FSS) and agreed the next steps.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: The Committee: a) Approved the proposed key actuarial assumptions and funding parameters in paragraph 1.05 and noted the proposed key actuarial assumptions in paragraph 1.12 of the report. b) Approved the draft FSS with the addition of a specific question to employers as to whether they prefer a 103%, 105%, or 108% funding target incorporating the sustainability reserve. c) The Committee delegated the refinement and finalisation of the draft FSS to the Head of Clwyd Pension Fund, as part of the formal consultation with employers, having regard to the advice of the Fund Actuary.
Mr Middleman took the Committee through this report and the FSS which sets out the minimum employer contribution rates from April 1st, 2026 to 2029. Employers will continue to have flexibility to pay above the minimum contribution requirements. He highlighted the following key assumptions and parameters, which take into account the proposed investment strategy set out in the earlier paper: · Reduced inflation assumption · Increases (relative to inflation) in discount rates relating to past service and future service liabilities. · Pay growth assumption is unchanged from the previous valuation It is proposed to introduce a sustainability reserve of 3%, whereby only when an employer’s funding level is above 103%, surplus will be paid back via an employer’s secondary rate, and surplus above the 103% funding will be paid back over a period of 12 years for all employers. Any deficit for an employer will continue to be repaid over the same period of 12 years (or shorter depending on circumstances. Cllr Wren asked if there is an impact of the Government's 4.1% increase in the living wage on the pay growth assumptions. Mr Middleman stated it will depend on the mix of employees affected and this will be considered as part of the consultation with employers and an adjustment to the outcomes could be made to reflect it. However, this is not expected to be particularly impactful as it only affects part of the liabilities, and the pay growth assumption is reasonably prudent to allow for these factors. Mr Hibbert asked whether requirements can be included in the FSS for employers exiting the Fund to provide information to the any affected members regarding the loss of LGPS membership, in order to allow the Fund to contact members directly and correct any mistakes in those communications. Mr Middleman advised that the FSS would not be the appropriate place for such requirements and the key area for the FSS is to ensure the termination policy is robust and protects the Fund. The policy is being reviewed to ensure this is the case. With regards to the requirements around communications this is something to consider in other administration processes. Mrs K Williams confirmed this can be considered as part of a future review of administration procedures around exits. Mr Hibbert expressed he was not content with the removal of the 110% funding level trigger and requested a discussion on this outside the meeting. Cllr Ibbotson stated the draft FSS contains a new section on climate change risk. Cllr Ibbotson welcomed the reference under the rapid and delayed transition scenarios to sudden repricing followed by stranded assets. However, he noted that stranded assets are not mentioned in the limited transition and failed transition scenarios. Cllr Ibbotson suggested this should be taken into consideration during the refinement and finalisation of the document. Mr Middleman agreed to consider this and clarify in the final version post consultation. Cllr Ibbotson noted that while the key funding objectives include the objective to achieve and maintain assets at 100% of liabilities within a 12-year average timeframe, the key funding principles later state that “the Administering Authority’s long term funding objective is for the Fund to achieve and then maintain sufficient assets to cover 100% of projected accrued pension liabilities”. Cllr Ibbotson’s view was that the Fund’s objective is to maintain slightly more than this in assets, with an effective target funding level of 103% through the 3% sustainability reserve. He said there has been disagreement among employer representatives on the Committee regarding the prudency of the sustainability reserve. Mr Middleman clarified that the solvency objective was correct at 100% but agreed to consider clarifying the interaction with the sustainability reserve which was targeting contribution sustainability only. Cllr Ibbotson moved that as part of the consultation with employers, employers are asked whether they prefer a 103%, 105%, or 108% funding target. Cllr Ibbotson moved that the Committee: • approves the proposed key actuarial assumptions and funding parameters, in paragraph 1.05, and notes the proposed key actuarial assumptions in paragraph 1.12 of the report • approves the draft FSS with the addition of a specific question to employers as to whether they prefer a 103%, 105%, or 108% funding target incorporating the sustainability reserve. • delegates the refinement and finalisation of the draft FSS to the Head of Clwyd Pension Fund, as part of the formal consultation with employers, having regard to the advice of the Fund Actuary. Cllr Swash seconded this motion. With regard to the sustainability reserve, the recommendation is to consult with employers on the minimum level which the Actuary advised that a 3% reserve is a reasonable position due to the prudence built into the assumptions. Through the parameters, employers can effectively increase their own reserves to manage their sustainability. He advised that the Committee should be cautious of setting the minimum at too high a level in the context of the impact on employers given the feedback to date from some of the employers. However, it is reasonable to extend the consultation to further options for consideration. Cllr Mullin agreed with Mr Middleman’s recommendation and expressed concern that setting the minimum contribution rate too high could be detrimental. RESOLVED: The Committee: a) Approved the proposed key actuarial assumptions and funding parameters in paragraph 1.05 and noted the proposed key actuarial assumptions in paragraph 1.12 of the report. b) Approved the draft FSS with the addition of a specific question to employers as to whether they prefer a 103%, 105%, or 108% funding target incorporating the sustainability reserve. c) The Committee delegated the refinement and finalisation of the draft FSS to the Head of Clwyd Pension Fund, as part of the formal consultation with employers, having regard to the advice of the Fund Actuary.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: The Committee agreed the next steps as set out in the report.
Mr Turner introduced this report and summarised the results of the member survey relating to the Fund’s exposure to companies on the UN human rights database, · 84% of the 1705 respondents supported adopting an exclusion policy based on the companies listed in the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (UN OHCHR) database · Just under 60% of respondents shared views that the Committee should consider some non-financial factors in their investment decision making. Further to these results, Mr Turner summarised the proposed amendments to the responsible investment (RI) policy. Cllr Ibbotson expressed surprise at the scale of the support for consideration of non-financial factors in the Fund’s investment decisions. He highlighted a comment within the survey responses regard the phrase “investment in conflict zones” being overly broad. Cllr Ibbotson felt this is a pertinent comment that the Committee should consider as part of the wording of any exclusion policy, and thanked the member for taking the time to submit this response. Mr Hibbert was pleased that the results suggest the Fund membership is broadly supportive of the current path being taken by the Committee, and that this should give the Committee confidence to continue with greater clarity towards a divestment policy. Mr Turner reminded the Committee of an analysis that was carried out in September 2024 regarding exposure to companies listed on the UN database. At that time, there was exposure to five named companies representing 0.03% of total assets. There is no longer any exposure in the Multi-Asset Credit Fund, and the exposure to the four named companies held through the North American Fund will be removed as part of the agreed change to terminate the TAA portfolio. On September 26th, the UN updated the database, adding company names, but there remains no exposure in funds currently held by CPF or those that will be held under the new investment strategy. This means if the exclusions policy is adopted, there will be no additional divestments required. Cllr Wedlake was pleased with the strength of the results. He felt it was important to also recognise that the employee representative has been representative of the views of the members of the Fund on this matter. Cllr Wedlake noted that the fund has a clear mandate from its members regarding ethical investment, particularly regarding Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories as well as climate and nature related matters, and felt it will be important to continue to uphold these views in the Fund’s future with WPP. Cllr Bithell noted that there have been strong feelings among Committee members on this issue, which must be balanced with fiduciary duty, so this consultation with members provides reassurance about the work being done. He highlighted that these matters are also being discussed within WPP. Cllr Ibbotson raised a technical query about agreeing on the next steps, specifically regarding reviewing and updating the exclusions policy in respect to the UN OHCHR database. It was asked if the process for this is being agreed upon today or if this is to be done in the future, and if so, can a date be set. Mr Turner clarified that the exact proposed process is not included in the recommendation, but the intention is for the process to be an annual exercise similar to the original analysis done in September 2024. The recommendations also include an update to the RI policy in conjunction with the ISS at a Committee meeting in early 2026. Within that policy, a formal proposal can be made for the frequency with which the exposure to the UN list is monitored. He noted this is important in order to avoid a scenario where the number of potential exclusions is so great that it negatively impacts expected return and diversification. Mr Turner explained that the Committee is asked to consider the proposed update to the RI policy to formally incorporate the RI exclusions criteria within the Sustainable Active Equity Fund. The specific RI policy will be included within the ISS to be brought to the next Committee. RESOLVED: The Committee agreed the next steps as set out in the report.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: a) The Committee considered the update and provided comments, b) The Committee agreed that the delegated responsibility to approve the final response to MHCLG’s Access and Protections consultation is jointly provided to the Pensions Administration Manager and Head of Clwyd Pension Fund, subject to the stipulation that the Fund will not support the increase in the normal minimum pension age, and noting that Committee and Board members will be asked to share any views on the draft which will be circulated in advance of submission.
Mr Ettles presented this report including: · Progress against the Business Plan · Staffing update, including the risk relating to staff retention which has been raised to risk level 16, resulting in escalation to the Chair of the Pension Fund and the Chief Executive of the Council in October. Progress is being made on this, and the Fund is currently awaiting information from the Council’s Human Resources & Organisation Design service. · National developments and consultations on which Committee and Board members are invited to comment. It is recommended that the submission of the Fund’s responses in December is delegated to officers. These included: - Access and Protections Consultation, with key areas affecting the Fund include the increase in normal minimum pension age (NMPA) from 55 to 57, and the New Fair Deal. - Technical consultation on Fit For Future regulations. Cllr Ibbotson asked for clarity on whether members of the Fund were affected by the recent Capita cyber incident. Mr Emmerson confirmed that the Fund was not affected by the incident. Cllr Ibbotson raised concerns about the fairness of the political decision to raise the NMPA and its impact on Fund members, especially those in physically demanding jobs. Cllr Ibbotson proposed a motion for the Committee to: a) consider the update and provide any comments, b) agree that the delegated responsibility to approve the final response to MHCLG’s Access and Protections consultation is jointly provided to the Pensions Administration Manager and Head of Clwyd Pension Fund, subject to the stipulation that the Fund will not support the increase in the normal minimum pension age, and noting that Committee and Board members will be asked to share any views on the draft which will be circulated in advance of submission. The motion was seconded by Cllr Swash, and Cllr Ibbotson requested a recorded vote on this issue. Mrs K Williams advised that the Fund is not being asked to comment on the government decision to increase the NMPA, only to provide comments on technical details of implementing the change in the NMPA and it is intended for the response to focus on this and how changes will be administered by the Clwyd pensions team going forward including software accommodations. She noted that historically when the NMPA was raised from 50 to 55, this was implemented at a future date rather than retrospectively. Cllr Wedlake felt that the Committee is still able to comment on the fairness of the political decision that affects scheme members. Mrs K Williams agreed that members may not be aware of the retrospective changes and the consultation response is intended to comment on the fairness of the changes given the impact on members’ ability to make decisions on retirement planning. Mr Emmerson reiterated that the change in NMPA has already been brought into law by the Finance Act (2022) and this consultation focuses on the technical aspects and protections to be put in place in the LGPS in response to that law. Cllr Mullin said the NMPA increase has been in place for a significant length of time due to increased life expectancy and pension costs. He felt that while the Fund may comment on this, it is a decision for the Government to make. A recorded vote was requested and the requisite number of Members stood in support of this. The following Councillors voted for the proposal: Cllr Alasdair Ibbotson, Cllr Billy Mullin, Cllr Sam Swash, Cllr Antony Wren, Cllr Delyth Jones, Cllr Antony Wedlake The following Councillors voted against the proposal: Cllr Chris Bithell, Mr Steve Hibbert On being put to the vote, the Committee agreed the motion proposed by Cllr Ibbotson. RESOLVED: a) The Committee considered the update and provided comments, b) The Committee agreed that the delegated responsibility to approve the final response to MHCLG’s Access and Protections consultation is jointly provided to the Pensions Administration Manager and Head of Clwyd Pension Fund, subject to the stipulation that the Fund will not support the increase in the normal minimum pension age, and noting that Committee and Board members will be asked to share any views on the draft which will be circulated in advance of submission.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: The Committee considered and noted the update.
There were no comments or questions on this item. RESOLVED: The Committee considered and noted the update.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: The Committee considered and noted the report and provided comments and questions.
Mr Latham presented this report including: · the 2025 report from The Good Economy on place-based and impact investments within the Fund’s private markets portfolio. WPP has now commissioned a similar report from The Good Economy on an all-Wales basis, · recent and upcoming commitments in private markets in Wales, with thanks to the Investment Officer for his work in this area, · an update on the setup of the WPP Investment Management company (IMCo), including a request to utilise the Fund’s expertise, as a result of which the Investment Officer will dedicate time to the company until March. Related costs will be refunded by the Host Authority. Cllr Ibbotson noted that the WPP RI Working Group (RIWG) has convened four times since the last update, including discussions on exclusions and divestment. He asked how comprehensively the Clwyd Pension Fund is putting forward its position on these matters, and requested an update on the direction of travel for WPP in relation to this. Mr Latham confirmed that the Fund is represented on the RIWG by both the Head of Clwyd Pension Fund and the Investment Officer, who aim to express the views of the Committee, including those in the investment strategy on conventional oil and gas which differ from the rest of Wales. The exclusion mandate agreed by the Committee today will also be expressed at those meetings. In addition to the RIWG, a group for officers and committee chairs has been established which the Chair sits on and will also bring these views forward. Cllr Ibbotson noted a shareholder proposal related to BP, and asked for details of the proposal, why it has been discussed by the RIWG, and what decision the RIWG is reaching on that proposal. Mr Latham recalled that this was around the disclosure of fossil fuels compared with renewable energy, and the WPP RIWG as a group agreed to support this along with other investors. Mr Hibbert noted the impactful investments the Fund has been able to make in the Clwyd area and wishes to continue, and would like to see WPP IMCo contribute to continue making those investments in North Wales and Clwyd easier in future. Cllr Ibbotson highlighted that the Fund invests more in small and medium enterprises (SME) outside Wales than those within Wales, and more in SMEs outside Clwyd than those within Clwyd. He said this means the local investment strategy is not delivering the local benefits it could, and he requested a future agenda item to reconsider this and how to focus more investments on developing the local economy. Mr Latham clarified that the best investments are not always local to North Wales although this has been the subject of officers’ work for a number of years. He noted the complexity of these investment decisions and suggested a briefing session for a more in-depth discussion without strict time restraints, before bringing this matter to the Committee. RESOLVED: The Committee considered and noted the report and provided comments and questions.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: The Committee noted the report.
Mr Turner presented the investment update. He highlighted that the WPP Sustainable Active Equity Fund has significantly underperformed relative to its benchmark and target, and there has been a wider trend in the last five years of active equity managers struggling to outperform the index due to index concentration and the performance of large capitalisation stocks. Mr Middleman presented the funding update. The funding level has continued to improve past the valuation date and is estimated to be 114% as of September 30, 2025 based on a roll forward from the 2022 valuation. It is expected that this would be slightly higher based on the proposed 2025 assumptions and the monitoring will be reset based on the final 2025 valuation outcome. Cllr Ibbotson noted that the sterling return on assets appears to have been consistently higher due to the long-term weakness of sterling. He asked whether the Fund’s sustainability reserve relies on this trend continuing and how this is addressed in the funding strategy. Mr Turner explained that within the risk management framework there is a currency overlay in place on overseas equity assets, with a policy to hedge 100% of the non-sterling currency exposure, reflecting the long-term policy that had been in place. Cllr Ibbotson said that if, over the long-term, sterling weakness is expected, the currency hedging policy may need to be reviewed. Mr Turner suggested a training session may be helpful in the future to discuss in more detail the role of passive currency hedging in the portfolio. Mr Hibbert asked if the intention of the removal of the funding level trigger is that should the buffer be agreed at 103%, there is no longer a need for a funding level trigger, or that there is another mechanism in place that does not require Committee involvement. Mr Turner said that the previous 110% trigger had served its purpose, and there would be opportunities to consider further actions through regular review of the funding level and contribution sustainability. Advisors, officers and the Committee will continue to monitor the funding metrics and provide opinions on actions going forward. An update on the Fund’s investments through WPP was presented by representatives of Russell Investments, including the background market environment, the Multi-Asset Credit Fund, the Sustainable Active Equity Fund, and WPP Private Credit. RESOLVED: The Committee noted the report.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: The Committee noted the upcoming Committee dates.
The Chairman asked the Committee to note the following future Committee meetings: · 2:00pm on 9 February 2026 · To be confirmed: February/March 2026 · 2:00pm on Wednesday 25 March 2026 · 9:30am on Wednesday 17 June 2026 RESOLVED: The Committee noted the upcoming Committee dates.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
The council hasn't recorded attendance for this meeting.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.