New Boys Head Up National Employment Savings Trust

How the new Liberal Conservative Coalition will tackle the National Employment Savings Trust (NEST) pension scheme remains to be seen. They have tasked a couple of true blues with managing Britain’s looming pension crisis: former Tory leader report to Iain Duncan Smith takes on the role of secretary of state for work and pensions and will head up the Department of Work and Pensions; beneath him is Chris Grayling as the junior work and pensions minister.

The secretary of state for work and pensions is a UK cabinet post, and the appointee takes on responsibility for managing the Department for Work and Pensions. The post was created in 2001 following a merger of the Department of Social Security and the Employment part of the Department for Education and Employment. The Ministry of Pensions itself was created in 1916 to manage the payment of war pensions to former members of the Armed Forces and their dependants. It has evolved to a far more wide ranging remit these days and in the current economic climate is going to have to make some drastic cuts.

Chris Grayling’s political clout has slipped somewhat since he expressed the view that homosexuals could legitimately be turned away by hoteliers. The comments were made when he was shadow home secretary. Meanwhile Iain Duncan Smith is resurging after being much maligned during his time as Tory leader. These two gentlemen have certainly taken roles that can make or break them. The National Employment Savings Trust (NEST) pension scheme has been criticized for its cost structure and for overspending on branding. Whether the Liberal Conservative Coalition will tinker with the scheme is unknown, but one would think that substantial changes are not unlikely.

Grayling’s views on hoteliers were, “I think we need to allow people to have their own consciences. I personally always took the view that, if you look at the case of should a Christian hotel owner have the right to exclude a gay couple from a hotel, I took the view that if it’s a question of somebody who’s doing a B&B in their own home, that individual should have the right to decide who does and who doesn’t come into their own home.” This, however, was an expression of a former opinion and he pointed to the fact that he has actually voted for legislation that would not allow such discrimination.

Chris Grayling is the Member of Parliament for Surrey’s Epsom and Ewell and he has held this position since the General Election in 2001. Graying previously spent two years as work and pensions spokesman from 2007 to 2009 and between 2005 and 2007 was transport spokesman. Back in 2002 he was health spokesman. At the level of local politics he is a member of Epsom Rotary, Chairman of Epsom and District Victim Support, and President of the Ewell and Stoneleigh Chamber of Trade.

Iain Duncan Smith has been given a role that allows him to build on the work he has been doing in a think tank that he set up known as the Centre for Social Justice. The reports coming out of the group have portrayed Britain not as a country in crisis, but as a society in crisis, where the financial problems with the pensions structure are just the tip of the iceberg. IDS, as Duncan Smith is known, believes that families are the building blocks of a healthy society. We can expect him to come up with some policies to give tax advantages to families.

IDS is an anti-poverty crusader and through the Centre for Social Justice he recently published a call for benefits reform that allowed people to continue receiving benefits for a short time after they continued working. Unfortunately given the current economic conditions what IDS is going to have to do is cut spending rather than increase it. The best he can do is change some allocations, but it is unlikely to meet the ambitions of his think tank. One thing that he is sure to go after is the penalty that sees couples that live together have less benefit entitlements than those that live apart – If Iain Duncan Smith ends this situation then it may well be at the expense of single parents.

We certainly have an interesting team at the pensions department and this is likely to be a very closely scrutinized area of the new government. Iain Duncan Smith once told the Conservative back benchers to ‘unite or die’ one wonders whether he will tell the British people to ‘save or starve’. That isn’t too far from reality as a result of the massive deficit that is running up. The How the new Liberal Conservative Coalition will tackle the National Employment Savings Trust (NEST) pension scheme remains to be seem. They have tasked a couple of true blues with managing Britain’s looming pension crisis: former Tory leader report to Iain Duncan Smith takes on the role of secretary of state for work and pensions and will head up the Department of Work and Pensions; beneath him is Chris Grayling as the junior work and pensions minister.

The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions is a UK cabinet post, and the appointee takes on responsibility for managing the Department for Work and Pensions. The post was created in 2001 following a merger of the Department of Social Security and the Employment part of the Department for Education and Employment. The Ministry of Pensions itself was created in 1916 to manage the payment of war pensions to former members of the Armed Forces and their dependants. It has evolved to a far more wide ranging remit these days and in the current economic climate is going to have to make some drastic cuts.

Chris Grayling’s political clout has slipped somewhat since he expressed the view that homosexuals could legitimately be turned away by hoteliers. The comments were made when he was shadow home secretary. Meanwhile Iain Duncan Smith is resurging after being much maligned during his time as Tory leader. These two gentlemen have certainly taken roles that can make or break them. The National Employment Savings Trust (NEST) pension scheme has been criticized for its cost structure and for overspending on branding. Whether the Liberal Conservative Coalition will tinker with the scheme is unknown, but one would think that substantial changes are not unlikely.

Grayling’s views on hoteliers were, “I think we need to allow people to have their own consciences. I personally always took the view that, if you look at the case of should a Christian hotel owner have the right to exclude a gay couple from a hotel, I took the view that if it’s a question of somebody who’s doing a B&B in their own home, that individual should have the right to decide who does and who doesn’t come into their own home.” This, however, was an expression of a former opinion and he pointed to the fact that he has actually voted for legislation that would not allow such discrimination.

Chris Grayling is the Member of Parliament for Surrey’s Epsom and Ewell and he has held this position since the General Election in 2001. Graying previously spent two years as work and pensions spokesman from 2007 to 2009 and between 2005 and 2007 was transport spokesman. Back in 2002 he was health spokesman. At the level of local politics he is a member of Epsom Rotary, Chairman of Epsom and District Victim Support, and President of the Ewell and Stoneleigh Chamber of Trade.

Iain Duncan Smith has been given a role that allows him to build on the work he has been doing in a think tank that he set up known as the Centre for Social Justice. The reports coming out of the group have portrayed Britain not as a country in crisis, but as a society in crisis, where the financial problems with the pensions structure are just the tip of the iceberg. IDS, as Duncan Smith is known, believes that families are the building blocks of a healthy society. We can expect him to come up with some policies to give tax advantages to families.

IDS is an anti-poverty crusader and through the Centre for Social Justice he recently published a call for benefits reform that allowed people to continue receiving benefits for a short time after they continued working. Unfortunately given the current economic conditions what IDS is going to have to do is cut spending rather than increase it. The best he can do is change some allocations, but it is unlikely to meet the ambitions of his think tank. One thing that he is sure to go after is the penalty that sees couples that live together have less benefit entitlements than those that live apart – If Iain Duncan Smith ends this situation then it may well be at the expense of single parents.

We certainly have an interesting team at the pensions department and this is likely to be a very closely scrutinized area of the new government. Iain Duncan Smith once told the Conservative back benchers to ‘unite or die’ one wonders whether he will tell the British people to ‘save or starve’. That isn’t too far from reality as a result of the massive deficit that is running up. The National Employment Savings Trust is a first step to try to force low income earners to save more, but it needs to be kept on track so that the compounding effect can start working.

Nest Pension Details

In March 2010 the UK government started providing further details about the planned National Employment Savings Trust (NEST) pension scheme, for workers with no pension cover. It was announced that there are plans to levy a two percent charge on contributions to pay for the start-up costs of the pension. This is for the repayment of a rumored 600 million pounds that the state is spending to set up the scheme. This is in addition to the 0.3 percent annual management fee, and could well turn out to be a barrier to attracting savers.

The National Employment Savings Trust is projected to eventually reach six million members after its launch in 2012, and it may get to as much as 150 billion pounds in asset size by 2050. But this two percent charge may put a dent in those projections if savy investors catch on to the fact that the government is looking to charge higher fees than a standard occupational pension scheme. Would you want to save above the eight percent minimum when you know how your fees are going to get eaten away by fees?

As long as the two percent contribution charge is in place the potential returns of investors will be eroded. Will the pension scheme outperform a no load index tracker? If not then its tax advantages alone will struggle to make the pension stack up against direct investment by individuals because the pension would be starting out at 98% of the index fund and the compounding effect of that missing 2% over a thirty year period is massive.

Stakeholder and occupational pension funds charge between 0.5 and 1.5%, but NEST still thinks it will come out as the cheapest option over the long term because it has a low annual management fee of 0.3%.But the thing to realize is that these fees are not as important as the fact that people have to start saving. The National Employment Savings Trust is necessary to avoid a future pensions crisis.

Whilst NEST has been set up to address the problem of low-income workers, this is not the only problem faced by the United Kingdom’s pension industry. Another big issue is the generous final-salary pensions that are given to public sector workers. Whilst the nation is running a significant budget deficit, the final-salary pensions are unfunded guarantees and officially the current liability of public sector pensions is a massive £770 billion. Unofficially it is though to be a trillion. Whichever of these numbers you think is right, it is certainly a big burden for future taxpayers.

Another problem is the good health of the nation. People are living for longer. This is something that really came home to roost in 2007, when the number of people of state pension age was more than those under 16 for the first time ever. By 2050 Britain is expected to have over a quarter of a million people that are more than 100 years old, versus just 12,000 today.

The UK state sector needs to be review not only public sector employee pensions, but also the state pension. In particular the State Pension Age, the earliest age you can draw your State Pension, needs to be reviewed. It is not really a question of whether it will be revised upwards, but by how much. Whilst the traditional ages for the State Pension Age were 60 for women and 65 for men. The currently projected changes are as below:

  • Between 2010 and 2020 women’s retirement ages are increasing to 65
  • Between 2024 and 2026, retirement ages for men and women are increasing to 66
  • Between 2034 and 2036, retirement ages for men and women are increasing to 67
  • Between 2044 and 2046, retirement ages for men and women are increasing to 68

The State Pension is made up of both the Basic State Pension and the Additional Pension. The Basic State Pension is the flat-rate pension that is paid out to those that have paid enough National Insurance. The way it is calculated for those that reached State Pension Age on or after 6th April 2010 is that they get the full rate of the Basic State Pension if they have paid in for 30 years, and a proportionately lower percentage if they have paid in for less years i.e. someone you only paid National Insurance for 10 years would get one third of the Basic State Pension. For those that reached your SPA before 6th April 2010 the rates of payment are different. What happens to this basic pension, and the way it is calculated, remains to be seen.

Clearly NEST is just piece of the pension puzzle, and there is a lot of work to be done to avert a crisis. Getting old gracefully could be an increasingly elusive target if we do not start making some changes now.