Agenda item

·        Review of work to date and summary of responses to consultation – Paper 10, Annex

·        Consideration of consultation document on AM pension arrangements – Paper 11, Annex

Discussion:

 

3.1 The Chair welcomed Mark Packham, Director, HRS Pensions, PwC to the meeting.

 

3.2 The Board considered a paper outlining work to date and a summary of the responses to the consultation conducted by the Board in April 2014.

 

3.3 The Board agreed to respond to the questions posed by the Board of Trustees of Assembly Members pensions.

 

3.4 The Board considered the draft consultation document on AM pension arrangements.

 

Decision:

 

3.5        Action: Assembly Commission staff to request that GAD produce an early estimate of the past service deficit and past service contributions for the 2014 valuation based on latest membership data and assumptions. 

 

3.6        Action: Assembly Commission staff to arrange a meeting between the Chair and the Chair of the Trustees of the Assembly pension scheme to discuss valuations and to request from GAD that the results on valuations are on two bases: CPI+3 and CPI +2.5.

 

3.7        The Board requested that the assumptions should be as flexible as possible, as a large deficit could make the new scheme look unaffordable.

 

3.8        It was important that there be clear triggers in the new scheme enabling change to benefits in the future.

 

3.9        Any communications on the new scheme should be expressed in terms of total cash contributions, split between past service contributions and future contributions.

 

3.10     The Board agreed that Death in Service should be x2 salary and survivor benefits to be 50% of annual pension.

 

3.11     The Board agreed that the qualification date for transitional protection should be 2012.

 

3.12     The Board agreed not to offer 10 years protection due to the numbers of AMs that work beyond NRA.

 

3.13     Action: The Board requested that Commission staff seek a quote from an insurance provider for insuring Death in Service in the AM pension scheme. 

 

3.14     Owing to the cost of transitional protection and in order to provide benefits which are reasonably equitable between older and younger scheme members, the Remuneration Board agreed not to propose additional tapering of the transitional provisions.

 

3.15     The Board agreed that the consultation should include the rationale for decisions made by the Board, specifically on total cost, compliance and a better balance between member and employer costs.

 

3.16     The Board agreed that it should be explained that responses to the previous consultation have informed this phase of the public consultation.

 

3.17     Action: The Board requested that Commission staff prepare calculations to illustrate how the proposed pension scheme may operate in practice.

 

3.18     The Board requested that there be clear dialogue with HM Treasury on a potential cost cap and how it could have an impact on a small, highly sensitive scheme, such as the AM pension scheme.

 

3.19     The Board noted that the consultation would be issued as soon as possible and that responses would be received in time to inform discussion at the Board meeting on 29 August.

 

3.20     Action: The secretariat would amend the consultation document to include comments raised by the Board and circulate it outside Board meetings for approval.