Up for grabs? Public attitudes on the pensions 'pot-for-life' proposal

In particular, member choice could shift the attention of pension providers and their offering away from the employer, and on to their true consumer, the member of the pension scheme, resulting in better value for money.18 The proposal laid out some details for how a member pot would work practically. [...] As outlined in the previous section, the first phase of member choice would empower those who do want to choose their pension provider, to be able to do so, easily, by giving them the right to request their automatic enrolment contributions are sent to a provider of their choice. [...] Secondly, a move to member choice would follow the full implementation of the charge cap, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) Consumer Duty and the Value for Money Framework, which places obligations on providers to secure the best outcomes for members.21 These objections to member choice also risk glossing over the problems of the status quo. [...] A pot for life is not just about convenience Given one of the reasons behind member choice is to complement the consolidation of the small pots, it is also hardly surprising that those who have the largest number of pension pots are also the most in favour of moving to a pot for life model under member choice (Figure 4). [...] 21 SUMMARY Foreword Steve Watson The current pensions system is not working, especially for employees Consolidation can help to deal with the small pots we already have A model of member choice can help to prevent the creation of future small pots, and stimulate greater engagement with savings Some in the pensions industry have reservations about member choice By and large the public like the idea.