Published: 04 October 2016
Today, NEST Corporation published its response to the government’s call for evidence on the future of NEST.
The response sets out the reasons why the NEST Trustee believes it should have the remit to consider a range of retirement options to support members when accessing their savings. It concludes that, if NEST doesn’t adapt, NEST members may miss out on the pension freedoms leading to a two-tier retirement system.
The call for evidence response can be found on NEST’s website.
Otto Thoresen, Chair of NEST, commented:
‘As Trustee of a pension scheme with over 3.6 million members, our driver is, and always has been, member interests. NEST’s mission is to help millions achieve a good retirement and offering a retirement solution is a key part of that work. We have a duty to ensure our members can access their money in ways that help them achieve good outcomes and meet their aspirations for retirement.'
‘Our mission hasn’t changed, but the landscape has shifted. Currently NEST provides access to small lump sums and can signpost members to annuities, but following the government’s pension freedom reforms we need to consider other options for our members.'
‘There will be a wide range of pot sizes amongst our membership – even within the next few years - and research shows most people want to convert their savings into a lifelong income. Our members should be able to take advantage of the new flexibilities, whatever their pot size. For many the costs of on-going advice, for example in setting income levels each year, just won’t add up.'
‘Our members, who typically are on lower than average salaries, are more likely to have modest pots. Without access to low cost solutions, they may just access cash instead. That means they won’t get the most out of their retirement savings and there’s a real risk of a two-tier retirement system, leaving NEST members worse off.'
‘We believe NEST needs to be able to consider new options which will ‘do the hard work’ for our members whilst providing flexibility and security.’
NEST’s response in summary: