The Scheme Advisory Board would like to hear your views on four governance models set out below.
Option 1 – Improved practice: Introduce guidance or amendments to LGPS Regulations 2013 to enhance the existing arrangements by increasing the independence of the management of the fund and clarifying the standards expected in key areas.
Option 2 – Greater ring-fencing of the LGPS within existing structures: Greater separation of pension fund management from the host authority, including budgets, resourcing and pay policies.
Option 3 – Joint Committee (JC): Responsibility for all LGPS functions delegated to a JC comprising the administering authority and non-administering authorities in the fund. Inter-authority agreement (IAA) makes JC responsible for recommending budget, resourcing and pay policies.
Option 4 - New local authority body: An alternative single purpose legal entity that would retain local democratic accountability and be subject to Local Government Act provisions.
It is recognised that a one size fits all approach may not be appropriate.
Final recommendations by SAB could be variations on the models described here, taking account of your feedback. Any regulation changes needed will be fully assessed before SAB makes final recommendations. We have not provided detailed costing of each of the models presented in the survey. The cost of implementation would in any case vary across different funds, but, generally, the effort and cost to implement increases as we move from Option 1 to Option 4. Detailed costing of any recommendations emerging from this exercise would be undertaken prior to implementation.
In the next section we set out a brief description of each of the options along with the opportunity for you to provide your views on how well each option compares against the agreed criteria.