This is in response to the comment from Andrew on the previous post. It proved long enough to turn into a post on its own.
Andrew is wrong on several counts:-
First - I said some of the problems not all are down to the Thatcher government.
Second - the Thatcher government did encourage contributions holoiidays from private pension sschemes, if only by the example they set in the public sector.
Third - it does matter about final salary schemes, because no contractual obligation is worth anything if the company goes bust or it seems in some cases when a firm is taken over although I'm relying on memory there.
Fourth - public sector pensions are in many cases covered by a fund - that is definitely the case for Local Government and I think also for teachers (for historical reasons teachers although employed in local government have separate arrangements) It isn't true for the Fire Service. I don't know about NHS, Civil Service or Police. Even so a substantial number of people are covered by a fund, which is why it was so critical when the Thatcher government forced Local Government to take contributions holidays on pain of losing central government funding. (It was also Thatcher who really centralised control over Local Government which by all accounts she hated with pathological venom)
Fifth - ask any employee of the Mirror Group about pensions but even without such gross corruption it is still possible for employers to take contribution holidays with externally managed funds. It appears that these are not contractual obligations.
Having said all that I agree we have a needlessly complex system - according to BBC Newsnight the most complex in the world. Brown's raid on the pension funds was just wrong and the limits on contributions to pensions schemes should be scrapped as should the requirement to purchase an annuity. I agree too about the need to raise the state pension levels, although since many people don't earn enough to save in their working life relating it to earnings may not be the best idea.
We also need a radical overhaul of the benefits system which hinders people's ability to save in too many ways, creating a positive incentive in many cases for people not to save, or if they have accumulated money to get rid of it.
