Meeting documents

Investments and Contracts Committee – the charity funds are now administered by the private registered charity, Y Gymdeithas, and the County Council is no longer the trustee
Monday, 5th March, 2007

INVESTMENT AND CONTRACTS COMMITTEE

 

Minutes of the meeting held on 5 March, 2007.  

 

PRESENT:

 

Mr. G.W. Roberts OBE - Chairman

 

Messrs. E.G. Davies, Aled M. Jones, Bob Parry OBE, John Roberts.

 

 

 

IN ATTENDANCE:

 

Treasurer,

Committee Officer (MEH).

 

 

 

APOLOGIES:

 

Messrs. H. Eifion Jones, J. A. Jones, Elwyn Schofield.

 

Mr. C.Ll. Everett - Vice-Chairman of the Isle of Anglesey Charitable Trust.

 

 

 

ALSO PRESENT:

 

Mr. Ian Carruthers - In respect of Item 4

 

ITEMS TAKEN IN PUBLIC

 

 

1

DECLARATION OF INTEREST

 

Mr. J.A. Jones declared an interest in Item 4(a) - Land at Rhosgoch and did not attend the meeting.

 

2

MINUTES

 

The minutes of the meeting held on 8 February, 2007 were confirmed.

 

3

INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS

 

Submitted - a report by the Treasurer in relation to the above.

 

The Treasurer reported that as a result of the investment management review in 2006, the Committee has reappointed HSBC Investments, but with a new team managing the UK Equity portfolio taking a different approach.  There is a need to formally confirm aspects of this revised brief in the investment management documentation.  The independent advice from Barnett Waddingham has been invaluable.  Their advice tended to conform that the Charitable Trust’s overall approach to investment management did not require fundamental change.  They also assisted in reviewing the performance of the investment managers against targets and in evaluating alternatives available.

 

The main conclusion of the review was that a benchmark of 80% equities, 20% fixed interest (or thereabouts) fulfilled the Charitable Trusts aspiration for long term growth and its requirement for annual income.  It is also necessary to aim for outperformance and it is understood that such investment carries the risk of losses as well as the chance of gain.   The issue of geographical asset allocation had not been extensively discussed as an issue arising in this review.  It is previously been recognised that the overseas exposure adopted by the Charitable Trust had helped diversify the portfolio and manage risk.  One of the reasons for favouring HSBC Investments over competitors was that they continued to offer a diversified overseas exposure.  

 

 

The UK Equities portfolio, as now managed by the Halbis European team, aims for 2% outperformance of the index.  The overseas equities funds are also actively managed except for North America and Japan which are index-trackers.

 

 

 

The Treasurer noted that he has now completed discussions with HSBC Investments and Barnett Waddingham regarding the alternative asset allocation benchmark which best meets the objectives expressed by this Committee.  An Appendix summarising the main options put by HSBC Investments was attached to this report.

 

 

 

He noted that the Option described as Eight (4a) best meets the Charitable Trust’s aim.  This has a 83/17 split between equities and fixed interest.  It offers exposure to Global Emerging Markets (GEM) for the first time - a developing investment market in the world economy, also offering more diversification.  Compared to the existing benchmark it puts more into UK Equities which have a higher outperformance target and less into the indexed funds.

 

 

 

The Treasurer further reported that Barnett Waddingham have assisted the Committee with the review.  Some charities engage independent advisors with an ongoing retention fee and Barnett Waddingham would be prepared to offers such a service.  The Committee considered that they can now revert to taking advice from the Investment Mangers and the Treasurer.  However, it was noted, that the Committee may wish to monitor these new arrangements closely and may seek independent advice in the next two years.

 

 

 

RESOLVED

 

 

 

3.1

to accept the report .

 

 

 

3.2

to adopt revised benchmark Eight (4a) and authorise the Treasurer to conclude all necessary documentation.

 

 

 

3.3

not to retain Barnett Waddingham further at this point and to revert to taking advice from the Investment Mangers and the Treasurer.

 

 

 

 

 

ITEM TAKEN IN PRIVATE

 

 

 

4

CHARITABLE TRUST LAND AT RHOSGOCH

 

 

 

 

 

4.........The Treasurer reported that following steps taken in 2005 to market the Rhosgoch site expressions of interest were received.  At the meeting of this Committee held on 8 February, 2007 it was noted that the Treasurer had written to all parties known to have an interest in this site and to confirm details of their proposals within 21 days.  These details were forwarded to the District Valuer together with advice sought from the Planning Department for preliminary views on how the land use proposals would conform with planning guidelines.  Copies of the initial assessment on planning issues were distributed at the meeting.  The Treasurer reported that under the charities act a qualified surveyor’s report must be attained before any disposal of charitable trust land and Mr. Carruthers has been appointed before in respect of the Rhosgoch site.

 

 

 

The Chairman welcomed Mr. Ian Carruthers from the District Valuers Office in respect of proposals by interested parties in respect of the Rhosgoch land.

 

 

 

Mr. Carruthers addressed the meeting and noted that 4 offers had been received for the Rhosgoch site.  He noted that when assessing the offers deliverability of the schemes will also be a major factor before any decision is made to sell the land.  Mr. Carruthers reported that again one party is unwilling to reveal sufficient details of their proposals and this matter would have to be resolved before any decisions can be made.  He further noted that the Planning Department of the County Council have been asked for their views on the proposed schemes, and he reminded the Committee that he had previously suggested that independent planning consultants views could be sought in respect of possible approval of the proposals for the site.

 

 

 

Members of the Committee expressed their disappointment in respect of the bids and option fees for the site.  It was agreed to request the Treasurer to write again to the interested parties for more positive bids for the site.  

 

 

 

The Treasurer noted that any future planning application for development on the Rhosgoch Site would be classed as an economic application and would be deliberated by the full Council.  As the members of the full Council and Trustees of the Charitable Trust a conflict of interest might arise.  He suggested that this Committee should seek delegated powers from the full Charitable Trust to deal with the whole issue of the Rhosgcoh site.

 

 

 

Following deliberations it was RESOLVED :-

 

 

 

4.1.1

to thank Mr. Carruthers for his work.

 

 

 

4.1.2

to request the Treasurer to write to the interested parties for more positive bids for         the site.

 

 

 

4.1.3

to recommend to the full Charitable Trust that delegated powers be given to the               Investment and Contracts Committee to deal with the proposed development of the       Rhosgoch Site before any planning approval is sought.

 

 

 

4.2

Submitted - a report by Mr. John Roberts, Senior Solicitor in respect of the legal and other implications relating to the unlawful trespassing on the Rhosgoch site.

 

 

 

The Senior Solicitor reported that in considering any action for possession of land, regard must be considered to the statutory provisions which impose on the Council obligations towards unauthorised campers with regard to children, homelessness and education and to any guidelines issued by the Home Office and Welsh Assembly Government.  Failure to do so would inevitably prejudice a hearing before the court.  A decision to seek possession must be shown to be proportionate and balanced and must comply with the guidelines and the Human Rights Act.

 

 

 

Whilst case law is still developing, the decisions to date suggest that all public authorities must be able to demonstrate that they have taken into account the welfare needs of unauthorised campers who are the subject of proceedings, as such needs as material considerations in reaching such a decision.

 

 

 

The Senior Solicitor further reported that he had requested representatives from the Housing and Social Services and Education and Leisure Departments to visit the site last week to evaluate the present situation on the site.  He regrettably reported that the Housing and Social Services Department had not visited the site.  Members of the Committee expressed their deep concerns that no representative from the Housing and Social Service Department had recently visited the site. The Chairman requested that a letter from the Department in question was required as to the reasons why they had not visited the site.

 

 

 

RESOLVED

 

 

 

4.2.1

to express the Committee’s disappointment that no representative from the Housing      and Social Service Department had visited the site recently to evaluate the present          situation at the Rhosgoch site.

 

 

 

4.2.2

that a further report be submitted to the next meeting of this Committee in respect of      the unlawful trespassing on the land at Rhosgoch.

 

 

 

 

 

MR. G.W. ROBERTS OBE

 

CHAIRMAN