Leading insurer Aegon has criticised the widely-supported proposals by industry and business for a new pensions commission.
Last week a call to the election parties to take pensions out of politics with an independent retirement savings commission was backed by the National Association of Pension Funds, Association of British Insurers, Trades Union Congress and the Federation of Small Businesses.
The NAPF published research which found fewer than 30 per cent of savers think recent pensions policy changes have made them more confident about their savings while 56 per cent feel more uncertain about their retirement.
Joanne Segars, the NAPF's chief executive, said this reflected "pensions policy driven by short-term priorities and political expediency".
Thee research found over 80 per cent support for an independent commission which should be politically neutral and have a wide remit to consider retirement issues. Ms Segars said: "A new standing commission will help make sure the long-term interests of savers, not the short-term interests of politicians, are at the heart of pensions policy."
But Kate Smith, regulatory strategy manager at Aegon, said: ''We don't believe an independent pension commission is the answer or that it will deter political risk. Dissecting pensions policy from the heart of government would be problematic, not least because it is jointly owned by the DWP and Treasury, with the latter owning tax policy.
"Instead we would welcome a cross-government department review of pension and savings policy joined up with other connected areas such as longer working lives policies and long-term care.
"The next government, not a pensions commission should be thinking long-term and we would like to see it put together a viable long-term savings policy that wins cross party support to stop the constant tinkering."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article