View more on these topics

Fiona Tait: Don’t dismiss the dashboard for not being perfect

An industry-built dashboard could deliver positive outcomes, with or without the government’s support

Everyone likes a positive story, but negative headlines sell. So perhaps it is not surprising that following the government’s wobble in its support for the pensions dashboard we are starting to see comments about why it won’t work anyway and how there’s no point in building it if everyone isn’t involved.

This contains a worrying hint of babies and bathwater – just because it isn’t perfect it deserves to be nurtured and shouldn’t be thrown out.

MPs request update on pension dashboard progress from industry

Don’t get me wrong, the dashboard absolutely would work better if every pension scheme was mandated to provide information and if the government drove the data and reporting standards. But pensions and technology providers have already put in a lot of effort and shown a surprising amount of unity in completing the first stages of the project. They could certainly deliver a workable model if required, with or without government “support”. An industry-built model would still deliver a number of positive outcomes which could provide the foundations for future development.

The industry model would most likely be driven by those who have already been involved in the project on a voluntary basis. Unsurprisingly, these are the companies where consumers can already access the information they need, albeit via a number of different sources.

This means the dashboard would probably not achieve the key objective of reuniting people with their forgotten pensions, since these are the least likely to be lost. What the volunteers could achieve – providing the regulators are on board – is agreement on how data will be collected and the initial roll-out of a consistent presentation format to their members and customers. This would be a pretty good start.

Ian McKenna: We must pull pensions dashboard back from brink of demise 

It would enable savers in more modern contracts to see the information they should be getting on all of their pensions and to become familiar with what it looks like. Once that has been achieved, pressure can then be put on those schemes and providers who have not joined the project to sign up.

Even without comprehensive coverage, the dashboard would still help schemes to engage with their members, help providers to keep in touch with their customers and, most importantly, help savers to understand what they need to do to achieve the best retirement they can afford. It is win-win-win and I cannot see any justification for not pushing ahead, even if the initial result is not the ideal scenario we would have liked.

John Lawson: Govt cannot wash its hands of pensions dashboard

The dashboard is not the only positive initiative to attract criticism because it will not single-handedly solve the problem it is aimed at addressing. The ban on cold calling, currently at draft stage, came about largely as a result of the campaign started by Red Circle Financial Planning director Darren Cooke and was heavily supported by pension professionals. Its detractors point out that the ban will not prevent scammers finding other ways of carrying on their activities, particularly from overseas.

It will, however, give us the chance to state, unequivocally, that consumers should ignore any cold call regarding their pension plans as they are not legal in the UK.

This is a strong message and highlights the fact that the industry is trying to protect its customers. It may be one step but it’s a step in the right direction. Even the most successful initiative in recent years, automatic enrolment, was rolled out in stages. If every employer had been forced to comply on the same date there would have been multiple systems or administration failures which could potentially have derailed the whole project.

Tom Kean: Pensions dashboard has always been destined for disaster

If the initial minimum contribution rate had been 8 per cent, the opt-out rate would undoubtedly have been much higher than it is today. Yes, 8 per cent is not enough, but it has increased participation rates and provides a good base to build on.

I don’t think anyone foresaw in 2012 that the prevailing sentiment in 2018 would be that automatic enrolment is something everyone should have and those who are not included are missing out. Instead of having to deal with employees who resent being “forced” to save, we are faced with calls to widen the scope to include lower paid and self-employed workers. Building on success is easier than trying to do everything in one go.

Of course, these are only three instances of several innovations aimed at improving pensions in the UK. What they have in common is an objective which is centred round the individual saver and not the needs of the industry or government.

This in turn has led to a weight of support by those required to implement them so that participation is seen as a positive thing and avoidance as something to be questioned, if not actually sanctioned. Just what I’d like to see from the dashboard.

Fiona Tait is technical director at Intelligent Pensions

Recommended

Offshore amnesty could bring in 5bn

The Government’s amnesty for UK taxpayers with undisclosed offshore bank accounts could net the Treasury up to 5bn.

Wells Street Journal: Pensions Regulator lobs a rotten Nest egg

Much has been made of the Government’s taxpayer funded campaign encouraging voters to back remaining in the EU. The Leave side predictably went ballastic when details emerged of the 14-page booklet sent to every household in the UK at a cost of £9m. Leading Brexiteers Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage also presumably received the handy […]

Delivering advice and guidance in the workplace

Three advisers share their ideas and experiences of helping employees with their financial decisions The workplace is instrumental in engaging people to save for retirement. How are advisers helping employers provide advice or guidance to their employees? Telephone guidance Financial education provider and advice firm Wealth at Work recently launched a telephone guidance service to […]

What exactly is product innovation?

By Fiona Tait, Pensions Specialist Ros Altmann reportedly hoped for more product innovation following pension freedom¹ and, according to one poll, 66 per cent of advisers also believe that providers should be doing more². This article considers whether there is a real client need for new products, or whether we should be focusing our attention on efficient delivery […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 3 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. If you lay aside the key objective then, as you rightly summarise, you need something that permits someone to aggregate my pension data from several sources which probably is: an identity model for both customers and providers; and a standard for sharing. That looks almost identical to open banking. What then is missing is a finding service for those looking for pensions and a lost property office for those providers with pensions and no active owner. Proceed like that and the issues with a big bang go away. Providers come on board as they can, a market sprigs up in aggregation and someone, HMG?, offers a pension finder service. Put like that the only thing being jettisoned is the name.

  2. Christopher Petrie 2nd October 2018 at 5:08 pm

    I cannot see the point a half-empty dashboard.

    If somebody can see their Workplace Pension (which is available to everybody online already) but doesn’t show their old Final Salary scheme, state pension or an old S.226 they once had then what’s the point?

    Either somebody gets a picture of their pension benefits or they don’t.

    To prove the point, I could send my clients their pension Summaries but only include half of their Schemes. When they complain I’ll just say Something is Better than Nothing!

    If you create a pointless Dashboard from Day 1 then its reputation will be destroyed from the start. Look at how the Money Advice Service never recovered from its disastrous launch.

  3. If it goes live it has to have impact and value as a poor first impression will really hinder any chance of repeat traffic to the dashboard. We can’t approach this as a layered journey with more to come. Haven’t we made do or rushed products to market too often in the past because the backers want a return. Why do it again with this?

Leave a comment

Close

Why register with Money Marketing ?

Providing trusted insight for professional advisers.  Since 1985 Money Marketing has helped promote and analyse the financial adviser community in the UK and continues to be the trusted industry brand for independent insight and advice.

News & analysis delivered directly to your inbox
Register today to receive our range of news alerts including daily and weekly briefings

Money Marketing Events
Be the first to hear about our industry leading conferences, awards, roundtables and more.

Research and insight
Take part in and see the results of Money Marketing's flagship investigations into industry trends.

Have your say
Only registered users can post comments. As the voice of the adviser community, our content generates robust debate. Sign up today and make your voice heard.

Register now

Having problems?

Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3712

Lines are open Monday to Friday 9:00am -5.00pm

Email: customerservices@moneymarketing.com