Member

Trustees may reasonably be expected to consider factors such as age, pot size, expected longevity and likely retirement behaviour when deciding whether multiple default solutions are appropriate. Yet the Bill provides broad regulation-making powers for the Government to specify how these assessments should be conducted. Given the central importance of these decisions to members’ retirement outcomes, it is legitimate to ask why so much of the detail is deferred to secondary legislation. Is there a consultation under way on how these powers will be exercised and, if so, what is the state of that consultation? How will the Government ensure that regulation supports good judgment rather than encouraging a narrow or mechanistic approach to default design?