View more on these topics

Malcolm McLean: Questions remain over Govt’s radical pension policy

 Malcolm McLean

It was as long ago as 1977 that popular American rock singer Meatloaf first recorded and published what, for him, was an unusually contemplative ballad entitled Two Out of Three Ain’t Bad.

The somewhat bizarre message of the song – addressed to his girlfriend at the time – was that he both wanted and needed her but there was no way he was ever going to love her. But she shouldn’t be sad because two out of three ain’t bad.

I am not sure how the lady in question would have viewed that rather mixed message – whether she was reassured by it, whether she felt sad as a result of it, or what. Because in life generally, just because something is not bad does not necessarily mean it is as good as it could or should be. It is a question of degree.

Take, for example, the Government’s three flagship pension policies: the new state pension, auto-enrolment and pension freedoms. How do they stack up and what conclusions can be drawn as to their worth and value overall?

Starting with the state pension, the new single-tier arrangement is simpler (or will be when we get past the rather complicated transitional stages) and easier to understand. How could it be otherwise when we are replacing a multi-layered system with a single, flat-rate pension? This will clearly help younger people to formulate their retirement plans and work out how much private saving they will need to supplement what they can expect to receive from the state.

The new state pension on its own is unlikely be sufficient to guarantee a comfortable retirement but it will provide a baseline or foundation for private saving and therefore an encouragement for low earners in particular to save privately on top.

And what can I say about auto-enrolment? Overall, it has proved to be a great success in relation to the numbers of workers being enrolled and, often for the first time, starting to pay into a pension plan with the help and support of their employer and Government tax relief to encourage them to do so.

Opt-outs have been surprisingly low and hopefully that trend will continue, albeit at a predicted slightly higher level through to the conclusion of the phasing-in programme in 2019. There will be a need to find a way of upping the minimum contribution levels in due course but that in no sense takes away from the very encouraging results achieved to date.

The third element of the flagship policies – pension freedoms – is rather less clear-cut and we are unlikely to know for certain for many years how successful (or damaging) it has turned out to be. The ending of the effective requirement for many retirees to purchase an annuity was certainly well received by the public when it was first announced, and supported by many in the industry.

But there are lingering doubts whether all the extra flexibility the new system provides for in terms of withdrawing capital sums in preference to a fixed income will result in many more people running out of money in later life. There is evidence that some people are unwittingly incurring extra tax charges as a consequence of their actions, which clearly is to the benefit of HM Revenue & Customs, not themselves. Pension fraud and scams also appear to be on the increase, directly or indirectly as a result of the new policy.

The concept is undoubtedly right – it is the members’ own money and they should be free to decide for themselves how to spend it – but there is little doubt we need better consumer protections and advice/guidance arrangements than those that have been developed to date. These could be critical to the ultimate success of the freedoms policy as a whole.

So whereas it is possible to say that the Government has probably got it broadly right in relation to the new state pension and auto-enrolment, there are still a few question marks about the more radical pension freedoms agenda and where it might be leading us.

Two out of three may be ok in most situations but whether we should be sufficiently reassured by it here is an open question. We – or, more likely, future generations – will find out in due course.

Malcolm McLean is senior consultant at Barnett Waddingham



More than £200bn ‘in flight’ on advised platforms

More than £200bn in advised platform assets are up for grabs due to acquisitions and replatforming, research suggests. A report by The Lang Cat says around £207bn in assets are “in flight” because of upheaval in the platform market. The report says: “This figure is a result of a combination of the takeovers currently being […]


Ex-Aviva boss joins Old Mutual Wealth as consumer champion

Former Aviva UK Life chief executive David Barral has joined Old Mutual Wealth in the newly created role of independent customer champion. Barral will feed into the company’s customer outcomes forum, which is part of its corporate governance structure. He will work across the Old Mutual Wealth group including the platform, Intrinsic, Quilter Cheviot, Old […]


The problem with a standalone equity release qualification

The discussion around whether to introduce a standalone equity release qualification shows just how complex the advice landscape has become. The concern is that advisers are not considering equity release products due to the current qualifications being more linked to mortgage advice. There is a real fear of failure to satisfy the regulator and ombudsman. […]

The Merchants Trust PLC – April 2017

Welcome to the latest update for The Merchants Trust PLC from the Trust’s portfolio manager, Simon Gergel. Portfolio Review The Merchants Trust reported results this month and the directors were pleased to announce a 35th consecutive year of dividend growth (subject to shareholder approval at the AGM). The Company is proud to be highlighted as […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


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

  1. I’m not sure I agree when you say “the concept is undoubtedly right – it is the members’ own money”. It is not just their money as the taxpayer has contributed significantly. However, this bargain was based on the premise that the taxpayers’ reward came when the member retired and required far less state support. Pension Freedoms breaks that link and in some cases the taxpayer sacrifice over previous decades turns out to have funded a spending spree for the recently retired, which they would never have agreed to if originally asked. Pension Freedoms seem to be far more based on current political need for support rather than any proper long-term strategy to actually help the population fund retirement.

  2. Living the Dream Dream ..... 4th October 2016 at 8:33 pm

    I agree entirely Malcolm, it is the investors money and they are old enough and ugly enough to make their own decisions on drawing down their cash!

Leave a comment