View more on these topics

Leader: Too much freedom isn’t always a good thing

Natalie Holt, journalist with Money Marketing Photo by Michael Walter/Troika

The Government likes change, apparently. That is probably because they are not the ones that have to deliver it.

This week Money Marketing reveals the next pensions evolution being eyed up by the Government. So far we have had pension freedoms themselves, the spin- off changes to taxation of death benefits, and the planned creation of the secondary annuity market.

Lately, the Chancellor has focused its attention at the other end of the savings spectrum with the introduction of the Lifetime Isa. Not content with that daunting package of reforms, policymakers have now set their sights on shaking up auto-enrolment.

The Government is understood to be floating an idea with the pensions industry that would allow employees to choose their own auto-enrolment scheme, thus completing the “freedom and choice” savings cycle George Osborne is so keen to engender.

By extending pension freedoms to the workplace, the argument is this would go some way to alleviating the small pots problem. An employee would be able to keep paying into the same pension regardless of job moves, and would have the freedom to choose which scheme is best for them. The ultimate hope would be it brings in an added layer of competition into the auto enrolment market.

Yet although there is some rationale to these arguments, the question that is more difficult to answer is, “why now”? Is the current market environment really the right time for this particular kite-flying exercise, when pension freedoms have already opened up a Pandora’s box of challenges as it is? The reforms have undoubtedly boosted engagement among savers, but the long-standing issues of insistent clients, unauthorised firms and the ever-present danger of scams all are yet to be addressed.

It strikes me there is a parallel here with the work being carried out by the new guardians for workplace pensions – the independent governance committees.

These are made up of expert members of the pensions industry who take the lofty position of holding providers to account on value for money and punitive exit penalties. These bodies have begun to move the market, and, despite efforts to get at the numbers, one has to assume they are paid handsomely for the privilege.

So is it right we would hand over these same responsibilities of deciding what a good scheme looks like to those that have to be compelled to save in the first place?

Too much freedom and choice is not always a good thing.

Natalie Holt is editor of Money Marketing. Follow her on Twitter here

Recommended

9

Govt eyes pension freedoms for auto-enrolment

Radical plans to let employees overrule their employers on workplace pensions risk tearing up the rules around automatic enrolment, Money Marketing can reveal. The Government is exploring reforms that will see staff pick their own auto-enrolment scheme, with the aim of drastically reducing the number of small pension pots and at the same time boosting engagement among […]

1

Sean McSweeney: End of auto-enrol commission bigger than RDR

The end of pension commission has arrived and the world for corporate advisers has fundamentally changed forever. This will have a more profound effect on corporate advisers than RDR or sunset clause has on their private wealth peers. Acting as a “broker” to distribute other people’s products is not a sustainable business model. Corporate advisers […]

Iain Chadwick

Johnson Fleming launches dedicated auto-enrolment services for SMEs

With almost 600,000 small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) across the UK reaching their auto-enrolment staging date between April 2015 and January 2017, workplace pensions and employee benefits specialist Johnson Fleming has launched two UK-first solutions aimed entirely at supporting these employers.

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 2 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. You are so right. This argument should have been applied to the forthcoming referendum as well. It should never have been offered ion the first place and it is only because Cameron can’t control his own party that we are having it at all. No other party would have even countenanced it.

  2. What do you expect from politicians, or those that seek positions of power? They nearly always act in their own best interests and frankly even the so called experts such as Ros Altmann, know vastly less than people suggest they do and more to the point, they simply don’t understand the ramifications of their agenda’s…

Leave a comment