The Board considered the findings of the Governance Review undertaken by Hymans Robertson.

I Colvin thanked everyone who had assisted with the review for their time.

The review had found that SYPA were well governed in all aspects of governance and the Committees and Board were engaged and clear on their roles.

Leadership was strong, and the Director of the Fund had a clear vision of how the organisation should be run in order to be ready for the challenges of the future.

There was pride within the Authority about the culture and history of the organisation but there was also a recognition that as the LGPS changed the organisation would also need to adapt, while staying true to its ultimate objective of delivering a first class LGPS service to its members.

The review suggested 5 recommendations to improve on already strong governance.  These were:

1. The Authority should consider adopting a funding objective.

2.The Authority should consider reviewing its LGPS employer discretion policy to include all areas over which it had discretion.

3.Review the arrangements whereby the roles of Clerk, Monitoring Officer and s73 Officer are filled to ensure that the Authority had access to the expert advice and support that it required.

4.Amend the Local Pension Board Constitution to require that a member of the Local Pension Board may not also be an observer at meetings or sub-committees of the Authority.  This would have the effect of requiring a new observer to attend Authority meetings.

5.The Learning and Development Policy be extended to cover all those who attend Pension Committee and Board.

G Graham asked the Board for any comments or specific recommendations to the Authority.  He also pointed out that the observers referred to in recommendation 4 related to the Trades Union representatives that attended meetings as observers.  Recommendation 3 would be discussed with Barnsley MBC colleagues.

G Warwick commented that he disagreed with recommendation 4.  He believed there was no conflict of interest as they were there in a non-voting capacity.  He would bring the matter up at the next Scheme Advisory Board meeting to seek their views.

The Deputy Clerk commented that with regard to recommendation 3, this would also have to be discussed with the South Yorkshire Leaders.

C Scott thought that the recommendation around training was positive but there would be an extra onus on the Board and they would need support and to receive the necessary resources from the Authority.  The Board also needed to reflect on their position regarding recommendation 4.  C Scott also advised the Board that the governance arrangements should withstand individuals who act without integrity.

Several members of the Board felt that they didn’t have enough knowledge to form an opinion on recommendation 4.

The Deputy Clerk suggested that the matter could be discussed at the Authority when the Board’s minutes were submitted to the next meeting.

G Warwick stated that even if the Board could not form a view on the matter, the Trades Union representatives strongly disagreed with recommendation 4.  N Doolan-Hamer agreed with this.  It was not known what Unite’s position was in regard to this matter.

The Chair thanked I Colvin for a very positive report.

RESOLVED – That the contents of the Governance Review are noted.