Member

We must have some honesty about what the regulatory purpose is, because trustees have been misdirected. I am involved in a scheme that has been subject to that misdirection: to focus excessively on the deficit, at the expense of not just the viability of the pension but the viability of the company. So much cash has been tipped in and now that the pendulum has swung, it is in a much better situation. How much better could that company have prospered if it had taken a longer-term view on its pension responsibilities and liabilities, and not tipped all its working capital into the scheme in a way that subsequent events have shown was unnecessary?