Latest: See "Reform threat to 'gold-plated' private pensions" (Telegraph, 14 Jan '12). Pensions Minister, Steve Webb considers indexation of pensions to be expendible.

Background: In spite of the recent example of the problems that the "light touch" regulation of the finance industry has caused for the British economy there have been calls from the NAPF recently for similar deregulation company pension schemes. Pensioners know only too well of how Maxwell was able to exploit poor regulation of pension schemes and how there have been many predatory attacks since then despite the various pensions acts which have been introduced to protect us. The OPA therefore remains vigilant and is prepared to vigorously oppose any deregulation which could weaken the protection of our pensions.

Too much red tape?
A speaker at a recent NAPF Conference claimed that there are now 500,000 pages of regulations and that this is clearly excessive because it is time consuming for pension fund administrators. This might sound reasonable until one realises that these pages are in the technical legal language in which the regulations are necessarily framed. Recently the law firm, Cameron McKenna, has produced a "field guide" which summarises these regulations which is only 18 pages long. It's written in plain English and it's not rocket science! One can't help suspecting that those who are pouring over the detail in these 500,000 pages are doing so with a view to exploiting loopholes in the legislation with which avoid legal obligations. Recent examples such as Visteon and Stephen Dorrell's Rivermead company show that such loopholes do exist even now.

Increased Costs?
We also hear that the regulations introduced since 1997 have made the administration of pension schemes much more expensive and therefore the "red tape" should be cut. This claim too is questionable. To take the example of the Royal Ordnance Pension Scheme the expenditure in 1997 on administration was £0.8m. In 2008, when the Average Earnings Index had risen by 53%, the admin costs had risen to just £0.9m, (12.5%). In any case these admin costs amount to just 1% of the fund assets so there not much evidence of excessive costs there. 

For the history of the deregulatory review click here.