By, James Jones-Tinsley, Self-Invested Pensions Technical Specialist, Barnett Waddingham
Building on the original commission’s achievement, in creating a consensus for ‘automatic enrolment’ that increased pension scheme participation from 55% in 2012 to 88% of eligible employees today, the government recognises that auto enrolment alone is insufficient to secure adequate retirement incomes.
In terms of the scale of the ‘adequacy challenge’, analysis by the Department for Work & Pensions (DWP) projects that retirees in 2050 will receive on average £800 less per year in private pension income than those retiring today, which is an 8% shortfall.
In addition, approximately 45% of working-age adults are not saving anything into a pension, while around 40% (which is nearly 15 million) are not saving enough to generate an adequate retirement.
Of the groups at risk, low earners, self employed individuals, and some ethnic minorities (especially Pakistani and Bangladeshi) are notably under-served, while among low earners and the self employed, participation in pension saving remains particularly low.
From a gender perspective, there is a 48% gap in private pension wealth between men and women, equating to a £5,000 annual income shortfall for women approaching retirement compared to men.
The commission membership comprises Baroness Jeannie Drake (a former member of the original commission), Sir Ian Cheshire and Professor Nick Pearce.
In terms of its mandate, the commission has been asked to examine the retirement outlook through to 2050 and beyond, focusing on the adequacy of savings, especially for low-income and high-risk groups. It will also evaluate the role of private pensions and broader savings, as a complement to the state pension, and propose reform strategies beyond the current Parliament, aligned with existing legislative initiatives like the Pension Schemes Bill and investment review.
However, the commission is not reviewing the state pension age, the pensions triple lock, or pension tax relief. Instead, these fall under parallel government reviews (including the separate State Pension Age Review, which was also announced on 21 July 2025).
Pension providers, regulators and advocacy groups have broadly welcomed the Pension Commission’s revival, but stress the need for bold, actionable proposals, including “bold, brave” reforms such as auto-enrolment contributions rising from 8% to 12%, shared between employer and employee, a need to view pensions holistically, engage employers and savers in long term reform planning, and offer clarity on a long-term policy direction. In addition, the commission’s recommendations need to be both credible and implementable.
In terms of criticism relating to the commission’s revival, there is concern that the 2027 reporting deadline means delayed action, warning of a “timebomb” with a decision cycle stretching into future Parliaments.
Additionally, the commission may just replicate past thinking and not sufficiently engage advisers, or tackle structural challenges like charging and employment patterns.
What are the implications of the commission’s revival for financial advisers and paraplanners?
Strategic planning and client advice
Clients should be advised to expect slower real pension income trajectories, and proactive planning for a potential gap of around £800 annually is prudent. The commission’s attention to adequacy may prompt higher recommended savings rates, and perhaps early planning adjustments for younger and/or self-employed clients.
Expect a shift to higher contributions
Industry voices point to the possible rise in minimum auto-enrolment contributions from 8% to 12% or higher, with higher contribution levels still shared between employers and employees.
Focused support for ‘at-risk’ groups
Advisers and paraplanners should carefully monitor developments affecting low earners, women, self employed and ethnic minority clients, and consider bespoke strategies, such as utilising small pot consolidation, phased saving plans or targeted communication campaigns.
System overhaul considerations
The commission's work may recommend design changes to auto enrolment coverage, including age thresholds, self employed inclusion and flexible saving mechanisms.
Collaboration with stakeholders
Given the commission’s stakeholder-driven approach (that is, working with bodies including the Trades Union Congress, the Confederation of British Industry, National Employment Savings Trust, etc.), advisers and paraplanners should remain alert for policy consultations that may request input from the advice sector and associated professional bodies.
Timing and legislative impact
With recommendations due in 2027, changes may be introduced during or after the next Parliament. Advisers and Paraplanners should track progress with the Pension Schemes Bill, related policies, and any guideline shifts that impact on long term advice frameworks.
What should advisers and paraplanners therefore monitor?
Pensions adequacy statistics: projected income shortfalls and demographic-specific gaps.
The commission’s interim findings, e.g. consultation papers and stakeholder-engagement phases.
Potential reforms to auto-enrolment, e.g. coverage expansion, contribution increases, self-employed inclusion.
Regulatory or legislative changes spearheaded by the Pension Schemes Bill or subsequent legislation.
Industry collaboration opportunities, financial services professionals may have input into different consultation stages.
Conclusion
The revived Pensions Commission is tasked with addressing the structural inadequacies of the UK pension system, particularly the risks to future retirees from under-saving.
With 45% of adults not saving into a pension, and projections of £800 less private pension income by 2050, a substantive policy review, rather than incremental tweaks, are required.
Advisers and paraplanners should prepare for potential higher minimum contributions, a renewed focus on equity across different income and demographic groups, and evolving auto-enrolment regimes.
Alongside this, the State Pension Age Review highlights the urgency of a cohesive long term strategy. This is a landmark opportunity, akin to the original ‘Turner Commission’ of 2002, to shape what adequacy means in retirement saving today and in the future.
|
