Coal scheme surpluses: Will Burnham budge?

Image: DariuszSankowski/Pixabay

Pardon the Interruption

This article is just an example of the content available to mallowstreet members.

On average over 150 pieces of new content are published from across the industry per month on mallowstreet. Members get access to the latest developments, industry views and a range of in-depth research.

All the content on mallowstreet is accredited for CPD by the PMI and is available to trustees for free.

The trustees of the British Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme and the Mineworkers' Pension Scheme met with industry minister Chris McDonald last week to discuss their requests for full surplus payments among others. A meeting for September was agreed between the BCSSS trustees and the minister.

The BCSSS and MPS trustees met separately with McDonald last week, and the BCSSS trustees agreed to have a further meeting in September. It is unclear who will be industry minister in September. Andy Burnham takes office as prime minister today and is expected to make new appointments but could also choose to leave some junior ministers in place.

Having received a £2.3bn investment reserve from government to boost pensions, the trustees of the roughly £8.5bn BCSSS continue to seek a change to the scheme rules so that if the scheme is in surplus, the trustees could distribute all surplus to members when it first arises, rather than after the next valuation. As part of this, they are also asking for clearer valuations. The government guarantee would remain unchanged under the trustees' proposals, leaving any potential future deficit to be picked up by taxpayers. 
 
The scheme's 2024 valuation report notes the level of investment risk in the scheme, saying: "The scheme's investment strategy includes a material allocation to return-seeking assets, so that future returns in excess of the buffer percentage are possible, albeit with a material risk of worse investment outcomes, including the possibility of additional funding being required from the guarantor." 
 
It adds that because benefit payments are large relative to the size of the fund, investment returns in the short-term are more significant to the success or failure of long-term target outcomes than returns further into the future. The fund's maturity and high benefit payments also mean BCSSS carries "a material liquidity risk". 
 
The £10.4bn MPS does not publish valuation reports on its website. Having received and distributed £1.5bn from its investment reserve in 2024, which was a Labour manifesto commitment along with a promised review of the surplus sharing arrangement, its trustees are also putting more demands to the government. 
 
They are keen to award members a new bonus this year, using a £1bn surplus in the scheme, and allow 100% of any future surpluses to be used to increase members’ pensions. The trustees are also seeking a rule change so that the bonus pensions paid to members in 2024 – and any future bonuses – cannot be taken away, pointing out that BCSSS bonuses were protected in this way. 
 
In addition, the MPS trustees are hoping to achieve index-linking of all bonus pensions as part of the 2026 valuation discussions. 
 
Like BCSSS, the Mineworkers' scheme benefits from a government guarantee. It has been running an investment strategy that, for a closed scheme, contains unusually high levels of equity, private equity and high yield bonds. 
 
   
   
   

Should the MPS and BCSSS be able to take all surplus and keep the government guarantee?

More from mallowstreet