View more on these topics

Gregg McClymont: Govt has not done its homework on pension charge cap


Last year the Government accused Labour of “scaremongering” on excessive pension charges. Earlier this year Steve Webb explained that capping pensions such as Ed Miliband proposed would be as inappropriate as capping the price of baked beans.

Fast forward to Tuesday night. When Steve Webb rose and told the House of Commons that a cap on pension charges was the right thing to do  – not least because he now said that buying a pension is NOT like buying a tin of beans – a spectacular Government U-turn was completed.

Labour welcomes the Government’s belated recognition of the peculiarities of a workplace pensions market in which the buyer is not the beneficiary and in which there exist significant information assymmetries and conflicts of interest. A cap on charges is part of the solution to the damning conclusions of the recent OFT report.

But Labour argues for a price cap as part of a wider reset of the pensions market. The Government would be wrong to think that a cap alone will ensure value for money pensions for the 10 million savers being enrolled automatically in a workplace pension for the first time.

First of all the Government has to set the cap at the right level including all appropriate charges. Already one of the UK’s biggest pension companies Legal & General has come out and said that the cap level proposed by the government is too high.

Moreover the Government has not done the homework needed to cap comprehensively. It does not have full sight of all the various charges levied by pension companies. Obtaining these will require the Government to set down the basis on which companies declare charges.

As the OFT pointed out, it is sensible for transaction costs to be outside a cap. However, this makes full transparency of transaction costs all the more important. Only this week the FCA in response to some excellent financial journalism confirmed the existence of one kind of hidden charge levied by fund managers. Worryingly, the Government consultation document on capping refers to “unavoidable hidden charges such as trading costs”. There is no good reason why these should be hidden and there are transaction costs which should be entirely avoided and others which, if exposed to daylight, could be substantially reduced in size.

Yet the Government on Tuesday night voted down Labour’s amendment to the Pensions Bill on the disclosure of all costs and charges. More widely while the Government has now accepted Labour was right on a cap, it still resists the wider reset of the pensions market we propose.

In a market like pensions, the fundamental problem is governance of the pension schemes through which we save. Without good governance, our pensions schemes will not be able to drive a hard value for money bargain on our behalf with the huge pensions companies and fund managers.

This must be the starting point for a reset of the pensions market.  It means the value for money of pension schemes, including the level of transaction costs, being assessed by a board of genuinely independent trustees with a sole mandate to act on your behalf. It means action to reduce the long tail of pension schemes which are too small to achieve value for money. It means assistance to ensure consumers’ hard saved pension pot buys the most retirement income possible when it comes time to turn the savings into an annual income. It means immediately lifting the prohibitive restrictions on Nest, which has been curtailed from delivering its full potential effect for driving down prices and raising quality in the marketplace.

This is the reset the market needs. Adopting a price cap was a start but deeper market intervention is needed to deliver pensions people can trust and a real solution to the cost of living crisis to which high pension charges are contributing.

Gregg McClymont is shadow pensions minister



Platforms say self-serve models can fight D2C growth

Platforms have argued advisers must look to adopting models where clients can self-serve or risk losing clients to direct platforms. Speaking at The Platforum annual conference in London last week, Axa Wealth managing director David Thompson said uptake of its non-advised platform Axa Self Investor had been “limited” so far. Axa launched its Self Investor platform […]

Lenders caught between capital rules and lending

Lenders are being pulled in opposite directions at the moment. On the one hand, the Government is keen to encourage banks and building societies to lend, as evidenced by the early rollout of Help to Buy 2. But on the other hand, capital rules currently being debated in the House of Commons are pushing lenders […]

Bambos Hambi 700x450

SLI’s Hambi sells Cazenove European following Rice exit

Standard Life Investments multi-manager Bambos Hambi has sold out of the £749.5m Cazenove European fund following the departure of manager Chris Rice, in favour of the £60.3m Artemis European Opportunities fund. The move comes as the manager adds exposure to European equities across the SLI MyFolio Multi Manager fund range, thanks to increased confidence in the region’s economic economic […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 6 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. He is simply unbelievable with his thirst for publicity without substance. i hope the electorate give him a message in 2015

  2. What a complete load of c***, we have went through decades of simplifying the products and now he wants to reintroduce trading/switching charges

    It is clear that the Politian’s do not have a clue how big Auto Enrolment is and how hard it will be to change direction now for people who have already staged withouty more people ending up in NEST and the capacity crunch getting worse.

  3. Lets just hope he never gets beyond a Shadow! More capping? Don’t Labour know anything about market intervention, look at the disgraced fuel capping saga, that probably contributed to the recent fuel hikes. And when he wants to lift the restrictions on NEST, he should look at the charges on this Government sponsored arrangement, 1.8% per contribution and 0.3% annual management charge!

  4. Every new announcement about AE schemes reinforces my decision to have nothing to do with them.

  5. AE is not going to change much.

    About 36% of UK have a pension, many of those people and their advisers are conning themselves thinking the £50 a month they pay to the Pru is going to afford them any retirement.

    The rate of UK personal savings is 2.2%, slightly higher than Italy and Latvia.

  6. So with his background in teaching British history (for which he has a doctorate) how does he feel qualified to make any kind of statement on anything pensions related?

    Its really time that MP’s needed some experience on subjects that they are mouthing off about!

Leave a comment


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