The report of the Director, West Yorkshire Pension Fund (Document “H”) presents the latest five year internal audit plan for West Yorkshire Pension Fund (WYPF). The plan is reviewed annually between WYPF finance team and CBMDC internal audit by carrying out a detailed assessment of WYPF business risks, pensions and investment regulatory compliance environments, and service developments.

Recommended –

That the report be noted.

(Ola Ajala – 01274 434534)

The report of the Director, West Yorkshire Pension Fund (Document “H”) presented the latest five year internal audit plan for West Yorkshire Pension Fund (WYPF). The plan was reviewed annually between WYPF finance team and CBMDC internal audit by carrying out a detailed assessment of WYPF business risks, pensions and investment regulatory compliance environments, and service developments.

The report revealed that during 2018/19 the fund had increased resources to allow Internal Audit to increase the number of staff working on service reviews which had translated into increased internal audit service quality and reviews for WYPF. There was now a monthly meeting with the Internal Audit Manager. To increase in depth service awareness and engagement with WYPF it was explained that the Internal audit Manager also attended Investment Advisory Panel, Joint Advisory Group and the Local Pension Board and was present at the meeting to talk on the report under consideration.

All internal audit recommendations in 2018/19 were delivered within agreed timescales. In addition to the five year plan a detailed resource plan for the financial year 2018/19 was also produced allowing CBMDC internal audit and WYPF service managers to deliver all internal audit reviews planned in the year. To conclude the audit each year the fund reviewed internal audit recommendations, which provided key governance information on risk management and control.

Key information provided in Document “H” included a five year internal audit plan 2019/20 – 2023/24 and the list of internal audits completed during 2018/19.

Members questioned the external audit procedure and queried how long the current provision had been in place. In response it was explained that Bradford Council was the scheme manager and that the fund must utilise their external audit provision.  Bradford Council did have processes to review and rotate auditors.  The external auditors, Mazars, had been appointed in 2013, a review had been carried out in 2017.  It had been decided that arrangements in place at that time be retained. Assurances were provided that partners from external auditors were rotated periodically. The first audit under the new arrangements was the 2018/19 accounts discussed at the meeting.  The audit partner was rotated in March 2019 for 2018/19 audit.  Members accepted that the fund was bound by the regulatory requirements of Bradford Council and it was agreed that information on those obligations be reported at the next meeting.

Members acknowledged that it was not the role of external auditors to look for incidents of fraud and questioned if there was an overarching programme for that purpose.  The Director provided assurances that external auditors would be criticised for failing to spot any issues of material fraud and that this was also an important element of the internal audit role. 

It was agreed that the management reports from internal audit could be circulated to Members for information and be discussed at subsequent meetings.  

Audit arrangements for the NLGPS were questioned and the Internal Audit Manager reported that collaborative arrangements were being discussed.  The Director WYPF explained that GLIL and NPEP, as separate entities, had their own external audit requirements and procedures.

A Member who had been unable to attend the meeting had submitted written questions asking if it was possible to identify the improvement suggested by auditors in item 3.1.2 (page 272).  The information requested was not available at the meeting and officers agreed to provide that information as part of these minutes.

3.1.2 New pensions and lump sums – Ill Health Pensions Auditors Recommendations:-

“In those instances where there are differences in the service calculation as a result of differences between how the previous Axise and the current UMP system operate, the decision made on how to deal with these cases when they are due to come into payment, should be applied consistently to all the applicable cases. The calculation of the Deferred Retirement Benefits for Member 885039 should be reviewed to confirm whether the calculation and subsequent award has been done correctly”. 

The recommendation was implemented on 8 February 2019.

The production of a comprehensive report was welcomed and officers thanked for their hard work.

Resolved –

That the report be noted.

ACTION: Director, West Yorkshire Pension Fund