Retirement Income Masterclass | November 2019

  • |
  • 45 mins 44 secs

Pension freedoms have been massively popular in recent times, but could it cause problems later down the line? In this Masterclass, a panel of experts explains more about adapting to 21st-century realities and the various investment approaches in retirement. Joining Baroness Ros Altmann to discuss, we have:

  • Andrew Tully, Technical Director, Canada Life
  • Joo Hee Lee, Multi-Asset Solutions Manager, Newton Investment Management
  • Kirsty Anderson, Business Development Manager, Prudential
  • Paul Budgen, Director of Business Development, Smart Pension

Learning outcomes:

  1. How you can adapt pensions to 21st century realities
  2. The different investment approaches in retirement
  3. The impact of reforms on DB and DC pensions

Channel

Masterclass


Automatically generated using Asset TV AI and Amazon Web Services.

It may contain errors and omissions.



Good afternoon, everybody. And welcome to this asset TV retirement income Master class we have this afternoon our four experts to discuss issues surrounding pensions, pensions, policy, investment for retirement. Ah, nde. Let me welcome our guests today. First we have Ju Healy, who is the multi asset solutions manager for Newton Investments. We have Andrew Tully from Canada Life The Technical Director Kirsty Anderson from Prudential Business Development Manager on dhe Pull budge in smart pension Business development director Let's kick off with some important issues surrounding the whole pensions landscape. And if we ever do get past the current policy hiatus, which seems to have enveloped Parliament for the moment after we have the election, then hopefully we will have time on space form or pension reforms. We lost the pension schemes bill, but I wonder if I could ask you what you feel. The experience of pension freedoms has bean so far what lessons we can learn and any reforms that you think are most urgent to take forward who would like to go first. Andrew? Yeah, I'm happy to go. First thing. S O officer Pension freedoms have been hugely popular. So you guys know that get clients at like having control over your pension pot to do what you like. Equally, most people have behaved quite sensibly because not being has not been lots of poor behavior, but but it will be. It will be quite a long period of time before we know in practice how well the reforms have have impacted people's ability. Cracker retirements also will be quite a long process over 10 15 years before we know how well people are adopting toe, suggesting you freedom so I couldn't go unnoted. Positives. So there's a lot of positive behaviors, but but there are some worrying aspects as well. So it's certainly some worrying behaviors and what we need to continue to educate people. So get there are aware off what? What could the outcomes or what risks got there taking on. People are taking a lot more risks right retirement than he used to do. So so is trying to help people understand what those risks are on. Help them manage those risks. Article crew returned. Kirsty Yeah, I completely agree with war Andrew was seeing, and I think you know, I spent a lot of time speaking to advisors around some of the things that they need to think about it. And I think the biggest concern for them and probably for all of us here right now is that because off the market clients are going into Georgia. They haven't expedience that volatility that potentially they have in the past. And if we think you know part of pension freedoms coming in, the majority of money went Intern unity is that it really wasn't so much a concern for advisors on. No advisors essentially haven't toe act as an activity as well as everything else. When you when you think about it, they need to make sure that the withdrawal rates create that they're tying everything. I'm with a client side to risk in capacity for loss. So for me, I think that whilst the market is going the way it's going on right now, you andi potentially clients aren't experiencing that volatility. It would seem to me a really good time for the advisers toe. Have a look at the process is make sure that what they have really is suitable for clients going into draw down on potentially extending whatever they had in place for the centuries investment proposition. Prior told this change and making sure that they're taken off the appropriate things in Taccone to taken a Cone am sequence after time risk in that type of thing. So extending that interstate lives retirement proposition, I think probably we picket thing. Yes. I mean, I think we can look for all sorts of developments. I don't know. Do either of you do you go from From what we say all of the past things are coming with the FEC pipes, pension freedom. Isa is the opportunity to look at our pensions early on. So from 55 before that, you know, 65 we retire and then we opened the pension port and probably we wouldn't know what we would do with it. But I'm early on. We look at the pension port and then we'll decide, you know, device a lot to do with that. What that also means is with longevity and the longer savings on help it. We can own the whole life cycle off the pension from accumulation to a accumulation, and that gives us again choices and again, coming with responsibility and from investments solutions on designs. 10 point is where that gives you gives us a lot more. Our freedom is where its flexibility we'll probably talk about your way will, yes, But I mean, it seems to me that with pension freedoms, there is the opportunity to get away from the idea of a strict accumulation phase and then a separate D cumulation days. You know, we can have a kind of flexibility and the gradual approach where we talk about people's lives and how this is fitting in with retirement rather than just having a pension age because of some people are still working at their pension age. I don't know if you think there's a really good point and I'd agree with people on the panel. The thing I would say that we're seeing is the real challenge Day is the cost of advice. The getting that right. That wipe product is prohibitively expensive. If you if you've got a pot off between £4200 on, therefore what we're working on, is it a guided outcome taking on board all of those issues that you were just describing, but also taking it from a perspective of the trustee? So you say the trustee in Certainly the master trust is looking after people from 18 to previously to 65 whereas what you're looking for, it's this whole of life going from 18 through retirement down too. 93. Exactly. Yeah, And I think this. This throws up enormous questions around communications, guided outcomes, but really important about investments because you now have a huge time arise and where there's lots of things you could do. Looking at Dee Bee world bringing into into d C World. But but I come back to to one of the things when when we do research back, it's back a tte our offices. We've got to get away from accumulation de accumulation content. You agree? Ingenuity. It is the biggest way to turn people often on well, what the words mean nothing to people. Anyway, We've already got quite a few questions coming. Let me let me go straight to some of those. What do you feel is a sustainable withdrawal rate, given the current market conditions? And how should an adviser look to calculate the withdrawal, right? I mean, that is a key question isn't here. That's a hugely difficult, genuinely looking you can get a nonce fits every person. I think it needs to be one of these things that's constantly reviewed year by year are not going to have a figure that you say is safe. It's called actually dangerous situation, because the guarantee that markets might fall or our markets might rise and you could be taking out more money. So So I couldn't gets one of these things that needs to constantly be reviewed. But realistically, in today's market, somewhere between three and 1/2 and for saint is likely to be sustainable. The academic evidence is around three in the whole level, but obviously some longevity various, so much person to person, and you can't predict play out from individuals. See, investment markets not just will get go up how the whole sequence of fraternal Custer touched on that. We can't predict her markets will change as people are taking money out. So So So that's why we just need to be constantly reviewing unlikelihood as people don't want the same level in committee here anyway. So so people want tick higher levels of income some years ago. In most years. Guess, guess idea off. Well, they taking a seeming come every year in life was almost one of the benefits of going to paint from freedoms people can flex. Which was why annuities getting everybody, almost everybody to buy annuities wasn't really appropriate. You know, we want U shaped income Some people have J shaped income needs on. There wasn't the flexibility to cater for that. It's a It's a very good point about the sustainability on which a 3.5 point 4% if you think of it, we talk about their level cradle law. But there is also really that underlying or sits a girl in nine with information. Then, of course, that is sound sustainable in terms of draw down. But then, if on the line or set stone grow in nine with the information I think I was, 3% could be fairly not quite meaningless. A bottom a bit on the danger. Recite from you're looking at 2040 years old drawdown. That leads on to another question, which was whether high income funds looks equity and fixed income might be the best asset class for a drawdown strategy to be able to get that sort of sustainable income level. Does anybody like it? I can understand why you would. You would come to that conclusion when, when the question you're tryingto wants, it's How do I keep asset value? And how do I How do I get withdrawal right of three and 1/2 percent, but I think we need to We need to come back slightly from that. And just what problem are we trying to solve for the end consumer? They're looking for a flexible income that is looking for an incoming the time that's both flexible and secure. And therefore, I think if we concentrate on that part first, the investment side of it is relatively straightforward on some of the research we've we've bean conducting with their membership is what what they're really looking for is kind of c p I that then, then they're not looking for the two or 3% above it there, much that they're very cautious, the very conservative in their approach to it. On dhe. I think we need to we need to think about the sequencing off what I would say the products. So so do we do a little bit of draw down, then annuity, etcetera, etcetera. I think the key to this team, Andrew's point of monitoring every way absolutely make it really simple setting. Forget you actually have to keep coming back to it to Russia. But natural income funds is the income is going to fluctuate once two month potential year to year, certainly on the underlying capital is going to various ago amount of income Someone's going to get is going to go up and down on a regular basis, and for many clients that that's just not what they want in retirement. So for girls have already got a nice level of core income on this is kind of a top up nice. The having come out struck. You can't work, But but not for someone who's only got £800,000 who's trying to take out? Yes, you're likely to need much more consistency. Well, Kirstie, they've been a few questions on the comment you made about sequencing risk. Yeah, which we've been talking about. Andi. I think people would like to know how best it could be managed water, the main strategies for it on dhe whether capital guarantee products may make it come back and have some role again. Would you like to take some of that. I think everybody will probably have different views on this stuff started degree and definitely do. Don't think there's a one size fits soul. Obviously, you know, given when I come from, we were we'd definitely believe in a multi asset solution and obviously and those early years off retirement, having something that smooth some of that volatility, we believe, is a rate due for some clients. But it will not fit everyone. And for some advisers, they may go down. You know, the bucket approach already made. You know they might go down, hold on some cash. So I don't think it would be right for me to say he didn't see how it should be done because there isn't one size fits all. But I do think it is absolutely my understanding not just the client's attitude dress, but their capacity for loss. I think that's probably really key, because when that accumulated, it's something that's really find a way. It's right here for them. No, so actually wore impact will, if he afford or 5% drop to their capital, Hobble Nim. Will that mean that we can no longer have a sustainable income. So it is all about income sustainability as a boat sequence that returned respects about stray spacing that and making sure the client actually understands the impact these things could have. What? One of the things that I've bean looking into is whether actually we're looking to short term when we come to the D cumulation stage and you mentioned that it's right here. But actually, if you're 60 you've got a 30 or 40 times a year time horizon, at least for a part of your fund. Yes. So what about the idea of dividing the amount you have in your sixties into four? And you know, there's 1/4 for your sixties, 1/4 of your seventies, 1/4 would be fury eighties on the final court of your nineties. Whether that each of those pots, if you like, would have different investment profiles, maybe would have some insurance built into it. Actually, yeah, we haven't seen any approaches like that, but I wonder whether we're working on something way are working on something. We do have a kind of blueprint off a product that we've been talking about, but we more importantly, we've been working on it for the last year, testing it with, um, with consumers putting him into a lab, asking them Not not, not lots and lots of questions on there's there's two or three kind of key learns that come out about the feedback from from individuals when we've tested it with them. One of them is kind of naming conventions. So if you talk to them about later life income and you talk to him about rainy day income, we talk about flexible income. They get that intuitively. If you start putting on kind of jog pensions jargon, the pensions industry is brilliant, that jargon, it is, well, class at it. But if you start putting down that, you alienate them. Yes, if you ask more than four questions, they drop off in terms of their interaction and their engagement with it. So if you think of all the all the great APs you use or the great Web service is you use, you will find at the heart of it. Somebody has built that around the user. They really understand the two clicks and I'm done type approach on dhe. The easier we've made that the easier is we're able to get people to a place where they feel empowered on. That was the real key bit to us. It's not scary. So language tone ality, easy to use convenience. And that was all about the use of jelly. Would that be in combination? We've got somebody asking about the use of retirement income defaults. I hate that word default. Anyway. That's a classic pensions industry jargon that will put people off. But you know, kind of standard fund or a normal approach or whatever. Defaults on retirement are intrinsically difficult. So so so So when you're building up pensions, you got a little time horizon. So so it's trying to design a default is relatively straightforward, but people take income and all sorts of different ways. Retirements or some might just be taking a tax free cash and not an income. Our guys might want a high income initially in a low income tryingto design, one investment strategy that covers all of those different objective. Second, it's impossible. I can see you've accepted that that's huge or difficult, even what before strategies. They've come up, I think, does difficulties within that approach. So So it's a guy ideal situation again is that people take advice on that involves the designs of strategy for GE individual forget particular circumstances and that that's not that, is the idea we get. So and I accept that that's no easy for particularly polls world. Well, it's a small airports and also, I mean, we're talking about centralized retirement income propositions. You know, we have pathways and so on. But in the end, can the industry really design one size fits all products anymore? Or do you think that there must be a more nuanced approach? And how can we use guidance on dhe, then move people onto advice to help them get the best out of their pensions? I think the planning tours can be really helpful in dead because, of course, every everybody sent to change a list in front. It is really personal investing and and again, the reform has given us the opportunity to own the whole cycle off investment. So that means that, of course, retirement is part of investment now, so it used to be savings is an investment in their retirement is just income. We drawer is. I used to be what we have to move away from that s so so. We owned the investment side off the retirement them is. Default may be difficult, but at least at least some kind of guidance to sway investors away from just going into cash or something seemingly conservative and, uh, defensive, but preferably not very good for there were. That's why dividing it into some that's pure eighties and nineties. It gives you that 20 years rising so you wouldn't think of investing in cash for 20 years now. But by the way, thank you, everybody. We are being inundated with questions is brilliant, and I'm trying to get through as many as I can way got so many issues already coming in. But I'd like to stick with this theme at the moment of how we best manage taking money out off a pension fund over the course of later life. On while we're discussing, there is one question that I just would like if possible of one word answer from you. Do you have a better name for de accumulation? I do. Um, I couldn't think of anything. I think any name is bad about lifelong income. Yeah, or anything. Must be a time levels of retirement income worth something We've called hours smart, retire and the reason what we called it that waas, because this is about retirement. But also it's about having these four pots and new being in control of it. So we did a lot of testing on this. Onda knew it. Eve had no no part in it. What whatsoever when I knew it is a very difficult one, because if you, if you mention the world in Year two people instinctively switches them off, doesn't but the actual described what nudity does, which is provide a guaranteed income. Kruger a time for the whole lifetime. But then that attracts. I'm not certain to be like the world has got very bad comics going back, Bryant. But it also only has that level payment on buying inflation protection is so expensive, you know, index linked guilt minus 3%. What's working Blanding will become more and more relevant is that you buy a bit of an unity and it could big you by Maurin UT as you get older, so so annuity rates are younger. Ages are no particular trap. If you get 75 on your Tourette's for about six and 1/2 percent. Ori doesn't need to be someone to fight you, but it just doesn't example if you buy it in later life. I'm buying in chunks as opposed to all of your money, into a new terror 60 or 65 that feels much more appealing and not wanna go. Worries about investing into retirement is is people at age 85 9 Thio like it is making decisions around investments, not for everyone. Some people were absolutely a perfectly capable of. Do not govern. Worry you might cut more vulnerable customers and things like that. So, so, so, gradually moving people towards a bit of guaranteed income as they get older. Yeah, E, I think I think we will start to see a little bit of that as well, and I don't know really what the solution is. And I feel like every time we talk about this, we come back to generally. Clients that have fine is probably in a key position because they've got someone acting on their behalf. Really, The big concerns your clients aren't taken advice. So war as an industry and war along, say the industry, did the government do about that because old pension freedoms were introduced. But I'm no entirely convinced Data communication has got anybody really engaged in what their options are. And I think long term, something we need to have a focus on that because we can all talk about it. But why you shouldn't take money out too. So yeah, overall message of freedom so far has been you can get your hands on your money. Actually, that is totally the wrong message and behavioral pushes of the freedoms policy. I mean that actually it's safe now to keep money into your nineties, because if you don't actually spend it because he hadn't needed, it'll leave it. Just leave it to the next generation types, really, rather than this 55% death tax charge we had before. So the product itself is designed well to provide lifelong income, but the mechanisms around it are still. If you like encouraging people to take money out too quickly rather than thinking, do I really need that, or should I put more in? You know, if you're still working in your sixties, why should you not keep contributing some of the legislation? Regulation doesn't encourage got behavior or go to jail and the you can access. But if you do access, the banks are good rules around that. But that can limit what you can put an infusion. And that feels a very stupid rule in that we want to encourage more and more people to save for retirement. And then we're actually saying We're not going to allow you to dio penalize them on. So the whole Polish frame, what doesn't feel entirely joined up? Yeah, I think there's more to do, Absolutely, We've got we've got the makings of a good framework, but I think we need to do more. There's lots of questions coming in about reviews for Drawdown. I think people are generally very interested in this approach for how to manage Jordan. We got the F. C. A is going to be looking at retirement income outcomes and so on on DDE in the current environment with exceptionally low interest rates. One of the questions is about whether advisors should be saying, Well, maybe we won't buy annuities just yet, but we'll wait until interest rates may improve. You've also got the issue that you can't buy inflation linked income at any reasonable price in the moment. So are you better off with the, you know, investing in the markets to try and generate your inflation linked returns? Maybe in stock market or other infrastructure and other in liquid investments? What risks does that pose? I think that's a really good question. And I think one of the advantages we have is a master. Trust is is that we have trustee ownership and oversight much more than I would say, necessarily within within an FC a world. And that's right. It lends itself really well to people with smaller pots. However, t the point about investment risk and investment assets, I think trustees and now really starting to think what the lessons learned from D B about investment in infrastructure. Andi alternatives. Because you now have this huge, great, almost internal market off off a membership where you're not having to sell anything. You're just you're on a big by side and there are certain things you can take a much longer view whereby you know you're going to need something that's gonna go throw out a bit of income in 20 years time, and that seems to me like a a really good place for for a chief investment officer on dhe Cheragh trustees to think to really think about their scheme membership on when they're going to start taking money out of their pots rather than Dickie relations. Let it start. Start with here on then. Really think about three d Think about those assets. The only thing I think would be a slight fly in the ointment is that we we've still got charge cap for authorized master trusts operating in automatic enrollment on whilst I totally agree it was the right thing to do it the right time. I think things may may have moved on. Now we need need to think about what is the right acid asset selection for that cohort of membership as they come up to take their money out. Yeah. I mean, an allied issue to that which, which a few people are asking about, is whether the investment houses need to do Maur to help people understand the risks off the long term investments, the predictability or otherwise, of returns on dhe, the impact of holding illiquid investments. You know, we've seen a number of problems with Woodford, for example, Now, if you're investing for the longer term, does it matter if you can't get your money out daily? For most people, they're not thinking of trading pensions and rapidly. But has Thean Destry done enough to help people understand the patient investment approach? The long term approach that hopefully can give you better returns than just short term investing? I don't want to take that one simple answer is probably no. So if we look away from pensions and look at ice is across the UK, invested in car show is way, we are strips goes that's invested, so suggests up. Forget the average Paris and investment, but looks difficult on the cash. But looks easy s sir, got would suggest that as an industry we need to encourage people or short term wine. Best thing is to your benefit and how it might help. The way we see is the time every hand that every illiquid a sitter is made equal. So some illiquid assets patients will pay off and and also I could return inconvenience you. So you locking your set and invest and we time there. They give you a return. But then some off there in liquid assets there they're sometimes they're created toe meet the demands of the higher that even chasing theat activity that we see, we find it a bit dangerous. If we just, of course, the example you just mentioned. It's one of the good examples the you know, the next thing we want to know is higher dividend, higher youth and a where do your stuff so it to really care for on any sense about what we're investing in. Do you think that there's a danger of taking on too much liquidity risk? Or do you think those maybe been not enough focus on just explaining what the impacts are? I mean it liquidity can come in a number of different guys is it could be real estate. Or it could be, um, very, very early stage, um, venture capital, private equity type funds where you know some of them will fail, but hopefully, overall, the portfolio will do well. Institution investors know that we've seen with D B schemes how trustees have got used to these different types of investments. What lesson do you think we can learn in D. C, perhaps from some of the ways in which Deby has evolved. When, 20 years ago, it was all just pretty much equities or bonds. How much do you want? I mean, we we obviously have a range of funds, but we have a very large multi asset fund where we do invest in alternatives on dhe and stocks that will be less liquid than others. We do our best to make sure that clients understand what that actually means, but I guess mainly for our clients, Morse will go via an adviser, so advisers tend to tend to explain that. But I think it comes back. I think we need to understand who's investing no on what's really important to them, and not that I want to sweet on th d. But we know the phD is a really big topical point right now when there's companies based in London, there are doing research with millennials around water as they're looking for, and if you just talk to them about invested money, they get the really to night. But if you start to talk to them about how these large funds aren't investing the money and what that is doing for the environment or you know the social impact that's having they become. They become very engaged. So the then perhaps a little bit more engaged in the fact. Okay, my money is not as liquid, but longer term. It's for the good of X y, and Zed and I will get a return for that. I think this is a passing phase. Or do you think it's a lasting approach, you know, sort of pr meta language? Or do you think this is really something that will last and catch on with Maura, Maura, investors? It's certainly not a fact that way when we talk Thio millennials are a typical membership. A lot of them don't necessarily understand that their money easy invested to start off with, Right, So so go your question about how do we How do we make this? How do people understand this? That we really do need to scale it back quite some way, so people understand that they are it first, what it is invested, but also that the trustee, certainly in master trust, the trustees are thinking about the social impact off that investment in the in the wider world. On as soon as we start talking to people about that which is important to them. Suddenly they want to know a little bit more on dhe. The second we put a fund fact sheet in front of them, they switch off again. It's it's not the biggest. It's the biggest thing you want to do to stop them asking any more questions. But if you talk about social impact, you talk about what that means and that that their money is going to to better society in general and things that that you get so much more engagement and research that I've seen em actually shows that once people understand that and they're so engaged in and they see the impact they want to save more kind of forces more. So it is really client treatment, isn't it? In a client, you know, allow us in as to invest in a certain a certain companies, and it's our duty to be more engaged and actively seeking what they're what they're trying to achieve. I mean, obviously, the more esoteric investments you have on the MAWR non mainstream investments you have, the larger the size of your fund needs to be to be able to spread the risk. Erica's which moves on to the issue of Master Trust. We've got auto enrollment. We've got millions of new customers coming in huge amounts of money, although per person not nearly enough and small sums from most off them. But where do you see the trends now as far as master trusts and the management of D C pension schemes going with 37 at the moment that have been authorized? But most people seem to expect it to end up, perhaps coming down with further consolidation. I mean, I think automatic enrollment has been a success, and if you look around the globe, lots of people are asking us, How did you do that? Would've bought with the lessons learned the do's and don'ts and that's great. 40 million people are now saving where they where they want, but But before we will high five each other and say Job, job, well done, Andi. I think that's our kind of started for 10. We now need to push on from this. We need to look a tte how we engage with people. We need to think about the TSG element, but also about the contribution right, and I think we need to be very careful that the contribution right at the moment doesn't become the that the standard of which you have to meet. You know it is a let's get them. Let's get people into schemes. Let's get them saving. Let's get the savings habit going on Now let's let's start t push on and look at things such as auto escalation, getting rid of some of the complexities of the you know, the tear one's and tear twos. We could save everyone a lot of pain and trouble by getting rid of that compliance element and using it to other uses. And dare I say, when pensions dashboard comes along, then people are gonna be more interested in as well. So I think you know, a job well done so far, but lots more to do. That's where we're looking for a pension schemes build. It was abandoned. Yeah. Do you think we're going to get the dashboard and how how would you see the industry developing once we do you think that will drive further consolidation? A. So far from what I've seen off the dashboard there so many different elements and eight hours involved, I think when it was first mooted, we thought there would be e single dashboard match, just not the kit. That's not the case, or I certainly haven't seen exactly how that's going to look. I think when it launches and it comes together, we need to make sure that we engage the end consumer with as well. But I think the element that we're forgetting here Donato Norman, I just want you to add There was that addresses the employed population. We've still got around five million self employed who are in the situation where it probably is right at the bottom, off the list. So sorry. I know that's detracted from the pension dashboard. I do hope that will engage individuals, I think, until you can see everything on there, which we're not gonna have at the outset. I'm not entirely sure how that will work, but, yeah, there ya go. But the ultimate moment, what grief? Everything, Paul said. It's been a huge success, but we do have gets bigger share but no, not known engaged population, but getting to retirement and I have to be completely engaged. So some somewhere along that generally we have to engage people will have to put you on board so hope, like a pension dashboard, may help with guys that it may help shore get people a reason for going to fight, become involved and trying to decide what happened. Like what like years ago in Australia ago was said, once people's average savings go above a salary again, that was kind of a trigger. Got people going, became engaged. And so hopefully in UK got might happen else. I think I think the aim of the dashboard would be to get people understanding what their money looks like, what it's invested in, what it could do, how much extra they might think about putting in. And that's where good investment options spread across a number of different areas might actually entice people into taking an interest in their pensions, which is really what we want, isn't it? Knowing what we have is a is a quite temple for reasoning. So I think, um, dashboard will be very helpful, and some of the technological advancement we have her son engage, read that investors, is where is just It's an investment management from investment management perspective as well. We can show what what we do with all the moola? More transparency. Consolidated National Don't be really powerful coming on from that. They're have Bean Cem issues recently where people are expressing or questioning whether having all one's pensions in one place. So consolidating everything together is a good approach, given what sort of protections there might be four pensions if the worst were to happen and whether we need to look more carefully. A protection for pensions a sw Far as the eye could see, dashboard is more interface and viewer it's not. We don't need to have one provider giving us everything, because diversification is actually quite a powerful thing. And even in liquid assets. As you said earlier, if we have enough offsets and volume that we can really diversify very liquid assets and I can venture Capital E. I think that having a having all assets off one provider I don't see is a major problem as long as you began, got investments diversified within that, so so I can't go. Big issue arises when people have money invested all in one place, and that's where your rescue rises. But if you've got a well diversified portfolio across a whole range from last month's financialservices compensation scheme should make sure that your family safe right? Okay, so that's That's quite reassuring, because I know a number of people have been asking on then looking at this going back to the four bucket approach that we were talking about earlier. Do you think there's a role for smooth income or for risk assessments over time? If advisers are holding people's hands, or if there's a maybe a five year review cycle through you know, your 60 seventies and eighties, where whether you get pension wise, guidance and then hopefully go on to financial advice, do you think that might be something that could attract people? Maur Interventions We did. We put a lot of thought into this and way. Think that the natural path of this is guidance rather than advice or non advice, and therefore we have trustee oversight. But we also have the ability for people to find out what they have, what it's worth now, what it could potentially give them in the next next few years. And it's also the ability for people to go on. Ask others and the number one financial advisor to most people is either mom and dad or trusted advisor down the pub when things like this. But it's it's the ability to have this in one place, which enables people to say, This is how much I've gone. This is what it could do for May on Dhe. Then have the ability to to move money around these different pots, as in one. They need it to suit them. It's It's kind of like the Netflix version of pensioners. I want this at this time on the in this way. And if you could do that, then I think you you've solved a lot of those problems is not about selling products. It's about producing an income at the right time in the right way. I don't know how you're going to do that without technology, because it's really tough. Otherwise, way behind the curve on danger industry. We're almost out of time. So thank you everybody for sending in so many questions. Maybe we should just finish by asking each one of you if you had one request for a policy reform that might be included in the next government's agenda. For example, anything to do with the tape. It annual allowance approaches to de cumulation or D B transfers or new investment ideas. Do you have one perform? Anybody who would like to start? What would you like you just mentioned? I think removing the Kev would be quite the cradle. Import something because we need to country a country. But more because that's the That's the four most important way and probably close to the guarantee. The way toe accumulate more. And they spend more simplicity, from my point of view, work up far too many complex rules that people just don't understand. So if we're generally what people to save more, we just have to make it. It's a hugely seven poor for going on about. I would agree with that, I guess if I'm not going to say that when my other one would be making advice or Gaitan's easily accessible so a little but enrollment in to go, I don't know. I think we need to look at something definitely get mandatory. I don't know if that's a little bit a little bit too much, but perhaps yeah, maybe that was your yes, it's tough being forth. I think if I said that, I agree with all of that. That's very sensible on great. I think if there's one thing I would like to see is the same rules and regulations for master trusts to be applied to other occupational pensions games. So having a one level playing field regulator? Yeah, but we we lift the regulatory bar. Hi. Hi. S So everyone is protected in the same way. Okay, well, I'm sorry. We're out of time. Thank you. Everybody out there for sending in so many questions that I'm sorry for those that I didn't manage to get to. But, um, I hope you've really enjoyed listening to the thoughts of our four experts. Certainly, we've had a really lively discussion. I can't believe where the time's gone. I hope you've enjoyed our asset TV master class. I hope you'll join us for the next one on retirement income on DDE. In the meantime, I wish you every success and enjoy the rest of your day. Thank you for being with us


Live Events