NAPF Value?

There’s a lot of discussion on Pensionweb right now about the latest proposals from the National Association of Pension Funds to put up their subscription charges.

It raises the same old questions- if we pay, what do we get? Questionable lobbying? Possibly a listening ear? Maybe some good training that may be free elsewhere?

The NAPF has a problem and always will have. It purports to be a spokesperson for the pension scheme- but it is largely sponsored by consultants and investment managers. Its council in years gone by has been flooded with providers, lawyers and actuaries. How can it speak for the pension scheme with such strong external influences?

It gets by- or at least it has until now. If the subscription charge goes up, the very members it says it represents will be the first to leave. Most sponsoring businesses are going through the recession with reduced workforces and cutbacks. The NAPF? No sign of any cut backs that I can see. And not clever to talk of increased subscriptions when times are hard.

It wouldn’t be so bad if they really did speak for the industry, but when there is a need for a spokesperson on TV, the news channels usually turn to Ros Altmann of Saga for the provocative sound bite.

When they do get it right, when they do get on TV as spokespeople, it’s good news. It just doesn’t happen enough. Not enough for a subscription rise anyway.

Stating the Obvious

Sometimes the headlines on pensions and finance require an appropriate amount of humour. For example, the headline in this week’s Guardian that announced a 10 year low in dealings on the Stock Exchange. When was this measured? Last week. The final few days of the Olympics on home territory.  Come on guys!

Or the recent headline in Professional Pensions magazine telling us that employers expect to see an ageing workforce.  Yes…. Tomorrow they will be older than today.

The most obvious pension headlines though relate to communications. Journalist after journalist expresses surprise that the general public know little or nothing on the subject. When we have to struggle with the quantity of pension jargon proposed by the DWP in their glossary of auto-enrolment terms, it's no surprise.