As Wandsworth Council prepares to exclude the press and public from a key pension fund discussion this evening, serious questions are being raised about whether the Labour-run administration is seeking to conceal the poor performance of its investment portfolio and wider financial mismanagement.
At the centre of the secrecy is the council’s £3.2 billion pension fund, and in particular, a failing property investment in the now-defunct Nuveen UK Property Fund (UKPF), which has been merged into a new vehicle, TPUT.
The council’s Joint Pensions Committee will hold a private session to review the TPUT transition—shielded from public view under the justification of “commercial sensitivity.” But many are now questioning whether this is a convenient way to avoid public scrutiny over financial failures.
The detail is included in a single paragraph on page 29 of the 52-page document [pdf] submitted to the committee:
Nuveen UKPF had significant underperformance in the quarter. This fund has now been merged into another fund (TPUT) and further information on the merger is included in the Exempt report later on this agenda.
A Troubled Investment Record
According to the council’s own investment performance report [pdf], UKPF has consistently underperformed, delivering a 3-year annualised return of -1.0%. In the most recent quarter alone (ending December 31, 2024), the fund fell -2.7%, while the benchmark for similar property investments rose +2.4%—a 5.1% relative underperformance.
To make matters worse, over the past year, UKPF returned just 1.3%, compared to the 5.4% average for similar property funds. In contrast:
- Schroders SCREF delivered a 3.3% annual return
- Legal & General’s property fund delivered 5.6%
- CCLA / LAMIT returned 7.2%
- And infrastructure investments like JP Morgan’s fund returned a massive 15.5%
Wandsworth’s active equity funds also fared poorly. The LCIV Global Alpha Growth (Baillie Gifford), Sustainable Equity (RBC), and Global Equity Focus (Longview) all underperformed their benchmarks over 3 years, with returns falling as much as 7.7% below expectations.
Council’s Claims Fall Flat
Despite this dire financial performance, Wandsworth’s Labour leadership continues to trumpet two main talking points: that it has frozen council tax and that it runs a tight financial ship.
Neither claim holds up to scrutiny.
First, while headline council tax rates may appear frozen, residents are still paying more overall due to precept increases and levies, including rising costs for social care and GLA contributions.
As a simple fact, Wandsworth residents are paying more in their council tax bill this year. Wandsworth’s only independent councillor made plain his views on the “untrue statement” of a council tax freeze at the last council meeting when he called it “entirely and absolutely indefensible.”
Second, the notion of sound financial management is undermined by our report published earlier this month, which revealed the pension fund had gone from a £350 million surplus to a £7.2 million deficit in just one year. That swing is attributed to actuarial revisions, poor investment returns, and inflation assumptions—all under the council’s watch.
Add to this the £1.9 billion in council debt and a £100 million capital funding gap, and the picture becomes clear: Wandsworth’s finances are not stable—they’re teetering.
Breaches, Oversight Failures, and Secrecy
The council is also updating its Breaches Reporting Policy—a policy required by the Pensions Regulator for identifying and reporting errors. Recent breaches include:
- Incorrect pension calculations affecting multiple members
- Delayed employer contributions impacting cash flow
- Data access failures due to administrative errors
Under the revised policy, only “red breaches” must be reported to the regulator, while other failings may go unreported—raising fears of under-the-radar governance lapses.
Tonight’s closed-door discussion on the TPUT fund transition will occur under the justification that exempt financial data is involved. But given the growing list of investment failures, missed benchmarks, and reporting breaches, critics argue that this is less about commercial sensitivity—and more about political damage control.
A Call for Transparency
In the face of growing deficits and worsening investment returns, councillors owe it to their residents and pensioners to face the public—not hide behind closed doors.
Because if the council can’t even manage its own pension fund transparently and effectively, how can it claim to be responsibly managing the borough’s finances?
