
Commenting on the General Election result, David Fairs, LCP Partner, said:
“A new colour of government doesn’t mean a radically different path for pensions policy. We will see a lot of continuity around some of the big themes such as CDC’s, dashboards and AE reform, and we expect to see the adaptation of the PPF to establish a public sector consolidator. Supporting growth by encouraging pension schemes to invest in the UK economy is likely to be high on the agenda.
“What has been a theme of the election campaign is where government spending is going to come from given the Labour party have ruled out any increases to the three main taxes. This does mean that an early review of pensions tax could be on the cards. We also wait to see what will happen with the new funding regulations. If the government wants to pursue a different approach there could be a significant delay before the new Code is laid.”
I don’t disagree with any of this, though I question whether it’s about the pensions policy that most people are interested in!
Nor does it reflect the agenda of the fund managers, insurers and financial advisers who make up the “industry lobby”. Steve Cameron has a good grasp on their agenda.
In truth, the new Labour Government will be lobbied by a wide range of vested interests (which is why everyone seems to want a permanent “pensions commission” designed around their agenda. It is also why there won’t be one. Government should not be establishing policy quangos (though it could be argued it accidentally has done with the current incarnation of the Pensions Regulator and its partner the Pension Protection Fund).
I expect a landslide of opinions on what the Government should do with its pension review and I hope that Government will focus on what matters to people not the pension industry.
We need a Government that is independent of both the ABI and the PLSA. It should not be subject to capture by industry groups and should be open to ideas from those outside the tent.
So don’t expect that the Government is a sitting duck. Please don’t assume that your agenda is the Government’s agenda and let’s remember that pensions belong to the general public to whom pensions are paid and not to the pension industry who extract their rents from the monies paid to pension funds.
It’s a shame, but right that you bundle PLSA with ABI in the excluded group. ABI will clearly promote only policy solutions that suit its members – the large insurers and there profit motif. But the PLSA really really should have been the voice of the members and schemes, but for too long it has been a regurgitant for the insurers or TPR, offering only retrospective wisdom. Nowhere to be seen on the disaster that was LDI (and a cover supporting the DMO’s soft coercion to buy gilts) nor offering a passionate voice advocating solutions to retain db pensions for private workers, and apparently oblivious to the irony that its Chair is running a large insurer at a time that industry is gleefully hoovering up hundreds of £billions in value away from members/schemes from the ( next) mis-selling scandal that is buy-out.
Time for a clear out, fresh thinking and a proper revisit on how to design a private sector system to provide an age related wage in retirement.