View more on these topics

MM Leader: Is the Govt making the same old pension mistakes?

In this week’s Money Marketing, former Conservative Shadow pensions minister Nigel Waterson makes an eye-catching comparison between the Government’s RPI to CPI move and Gordon Brown’s infamous raid on pensions in 1997.

Waterson, who shadowed the pension brief for the Tories from 2005 until the general election when he lost his seat, says the move was not discussed in opposition and suggests it was driven through by the Treasury as a cost-cutting measure.

The Government line is that CPI is a more appropriate and fairer measure of inflation.

But many suspect the move has more to do with the £85.9bn the Department for Work and Pensions estimates will be saved through the switch rather than a desire to create a fairer system.

The policy did not appear in the LibDem manifesto and Waterson’s revelation that it was not discussed as part of the Conservative party’s pension strategy only adds to these suspicions.

Although Brown’s removal of advance corporation tax relief on dividends for pension schemes raised many concerns from the pensions industry when it was introduced, it was years before the impact of the changes hit home with the wider electorate.

The infamous policy was intrinsically linked to Gordon Brown and for many people it became the ultimate symbol of Labour’s pension failures.

The economic climate is vastly different now and there is a certain acceptance among the electorate of the need to make significant cuts to the public purse.
But voter anger over the RPI-CPI move may well come back to haunt the current administration in the future when the effects hit home.

Waterson is also right to question the frenetic speed at which new pension policies are being introduced.

Many of the coalition’s pension proposals are a vast improvement on Labour’s seeming desire to make things as complicated as possible. But in its eagerness to make its mark, the Government must be wary of the potential negative effects of this haste.

It is feared the flexible and capped drawdown regime, applicable from April, has been introduced too quickly.

Providers will be rushing to market with new offerings in the next few months. Let us hope that too many corners have not been cut to satisfy the Government’s need for speed.

Recommended

Gartmore hit with £7bn fund outflows

Gartmore saw £7.2bn of net new business outflows last year as star managers left and the company started takeover talks with Henderson. Gartmore, which is set to be acquired by Henderson in April, also revealed a £2.1m interim FSCS interim levy bill in its 2010 results. Assets under management fell from £22.2bn to £17.2bn while […]

1

Rowanmoor to absorb FSCS levy

Rowanmoor Pensions says it will not pass on the cost of the FSCS interim levy to clients. The Sipp and Ssas provider says it will continue to absorb the charge as a business expense despite “exceptional compensation claims” forcing the FSCS to impose an interim levy on regulated firms. James Hay Partnership recently wrote to […]

Thumbnail

Case study: administration — implementing a management log

Our client is a leading video game and publishing company best known for its console role-playing game franchises. The client provides a number of benefits, at varying levels and cost that attract a P11d liability. With the absence of a management log to track data for benefit movements, enormous administrative and therefore cost implications were occurring each year just to comply with P11d reporting requirements.

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There is one comment at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. When I worked for a large organisation my package included a final salary pension scheme with benefits linked to RPI in retirement.

    Every year I received a statement from the company showing what my overall package was worth taking into account this RPI linked retirement pension.

    Surely this move to CPI is illegal as I have always been led to believe that my pension was deferred salary and the last time I looked changing an employees contract of employment without consultation was illegal.

    One also wonders how many people who didnt move from a final salary scheme to a personal pension would now have been better off in a personal pension as a result of the move to CPI?

Leave a comment