To mitigate and address the adverse consequences of some of the proposals, whilst supporting the push for growth.
The key points in the ACA response are that:
Instead of focussing on a minimum number of default funds, it would be better and safer to focus on the scale of the underlying funds,
Continue to permit differential pricing on the grounds it is essential to encouraging investment in productive assets and so as not to adversely impacting employer support for pensions saving,
Prioritising and continuing with existing measures (VFM, small pots etc) and avoid trying to squeeze massive transition programmes into too shorter timeframes. The Australian model has developed over decades, and any transition needs to take account of the UK’s long pensions experience and the quite difference history that other countries will have had,
In addition, the ACA response calls for greater consistency in the framework and requirements for employers on ensuring Value for Members and is supportive of making it easier to transfer and consolidate contract arrangements subject to appropriate safeguards.
ACA Chair, Stewart Hastie thanked Tess Page and the ACA DC Committee for preparing its response and added: “We also urge Government to look to the DB side of UK pension provision in furthering its objectives for growth by bringing forward legislation to better enable the transfer of DB surplus into DC arrangements. This could not only fund DC benefits for current and future workers and provide some much-needed positive incentives to UK employers but also provide greater near term support for increasing the scale of some specific DC funds. We continue to be disappointed that legislative changes in this area seem to have been put on the back-burner when they could offer an extremely valuable and quicker boost to both investment and member outcomes.”
ACA Pensions Investment review Consultation Response in Full
|
