Member

I do not care for the terminology. “Solutions” is a word that has become a bit tainted by overuse: there are transport solutions and holiday solutions, and now we have pension solutions—perhaps we could have had a better word. The use of “solution” suggests that there is a puzzle. Solutions are required because you have a puzzle. My point here could have been made on the whole of this section of the Bill. A long time ago, we had the discussion—I was not here—on small pots. There were discussions on consolidating dormant pots, on the need for scale and asset allocation rules for DC schemes, and today on default arrangements. We also have the contractual override. This whole series of measures is required because of the failure, 40 years ago, of the then Conservative Government’s policy of personal pensions. That is why we are here this afternoon. Personal pensions have failed, and they have to be patched up by this series of measures in order to achieve a reasonable income for people. It reaches its peak in this section. People get to retirement, having accumulated this pot, and the question is: how do most of them transfer that pot into a pension income of some sort? Some may take a lump sum—I accept that people should have that choice—but I find the concept of a default lump sum even more of a problem.