I support the issue raised by both these amendments on the advice scheme. It is a key part of the proposed scheme that advice is available to people at an affordable cost. In the past, the major impediment to selling pension schemes to much of the population has been the cost of advice relative to the amount to be invested. The scheme for extending pensions to more individuals seems to rest on the assumption that we can create a low-cost generic advice scheme. I, among others, have expressed scepticism about the extent to which the notion of generic advice is feasible. As soon as you get intoan individual situation and deal with a range of circumstances, benefits and debts, it is questionable whether generic advice will be sustainable or whether you will get driven into providing individual advice that deals with those particular circumstances. As soon as you are driven into giving individual advice, you are bound to end up with a costly advice process.
Before we go much further in the next Bill into the development of the scheme, we should have an early discussion on practical proposals as to how the proposed generic advice scheme is going to work, and satisfy ourselves that it is plausible and that it is not going to disadvantage pension providers outside the state scheme, as my noble friend Lady Noakes said.
Pensions Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Blackwell
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 11 June 2007.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Pensions Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
692 c1520-1 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:38:51 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_401771
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_401771
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_401771