03/29/2024

Wales News Online

Local & National News for Wales

SWANSEA Conservatives have objected to a decision to pay a senior salary to the chairman of a pension committee and backdate it a year.

They voted against a recommendation to make the payment totalling £11,500 per year from now on to the chair of the committee, which oversees the City and County of Swansea Pension Fund, and also backdate it to include the whole of the 2021-22 financial year.

The recommendation was approved by councillors – but it has now emerged that no retrospective payment will be made for 2021-22 and that the current chairman, Cllr Clive Lloyd, would not have accepted it anyway.

The latest position concludes a somewhat confusing episode which began at a meeting of full council, when chief finance officer Ben Smith outlined the senior salary recommendation.

Want To Advertise Here?

Contact Us Today

We will not send you spam. Our team will be in touch within 24 to 48 hours Mon-Fri (but often much quicker)
Thanks. We will be in touch.

Mr Smith explained that the pension fund chairman role had become a “significant duty”, that the fund was now worth £2.9 billion, and that the current chairman had carried out the work required in 2021-22. Mr Smith added that the payment would come from the pension fund rather than the council.

He was asked by Labour councillors David Phillips and Rob Stewart to clarify if the recommendation was to backdate the senior salary. Cllr Stewart said he was given to understand that it would not be backdated, but that he was not going to argue against it given Mr Smith’s comments.

Mr Smith said: “It seems to me not fair to not make it backdated for the year because the work has been done, and the whole charge does go to the pension fund.”

Cllr Phil Downing, who serves on the pension fund committee, said the chairman’s work “has really grown and grown”. The Labour councillor congratulated the current chairman, Cllr Clive Lloyd, who is standing down at the local Government elections in May, for the amount of work he has put into the role, including efforts to divest a big chunk of fossil fuel investments.

“I think this (senior salary proposal) is in recognition of the extra work involved,” said Cllr Downing.

Mr Smith said that the pension fund committee, which includes external stakeholder representation, had approved the proposal.

A majority of councillors approved the recommendation, but some abstained and some opposed it.

Speaking afterwards, Swansea Conservatives leader, Cllr Lyndon Jones, said he did not think a senior salary should apply to the role, and that backdating it was “unacceptable”.

Cllr Stewart told the Local Democracy Reporting Service:

“Following clarification of the advice from the chief finance officer no retrospective payment will be made, and the current chair, Cllr Lloyd, has been very clear he would not have accepted it.”

Cllr Jones said Cllr Lloyd’s stance was “the honourable thing” to do.

Salaries are paid to the chairs of some council committees to reflect the breadth and scope of the work involved, but that hasn’t applied to date for the Swansea pension fund committee.

This makes Swansea an outlier.  There are seven other council pension fund committees in Wales which administer local Government pension schemes, like Swansea does.

The report before full council said the chairs of four of these committees were paid a senior salary for the role, while the chairs of the other three already had a senior salary because there were cabinet members.

The discretionary payment which has now been approved for the Swansea pension fund chair going forward will only be paid when the post-holder doesn’t have a senior salary. Cllr Clive Lloyd, the current committee chairman, doesn’t have a senior salary although he did in past when he was a cabinet member and a deputy leader.

The report before councillors said the demands and complexity of the role of the pension fund committee chair had increased over the last 20 years, during which time the fund’s value had soared from £500 million to £2.9 billion.

There was more scrutiny and lobbying related to the fund’s assets, it said, and a requirement to shape ethical investment strategies.

%d bloggers like this: