Critical Social Policy, 22(4), November 2002, pp.551-571.
Publisher:
Sage
The government, in its 1998 pensions Green Paper, has set out to establish a `New Insurance Contract'. It promises security in retirement for those who cannot afford to provide for themselves and a strengthened private pensions framework for those who can. In return, it expects individuals, wherever possible, to provide for their own retirement. This article argues that the security promised
The government, in its 1998 pensions Green Paper, has set out to establish a `New Insurance Contract'. It promises security in retirement for those who cannot afford to provide for themselves and a strengthened private pensions framework for those who can. In return, it expects individuals, wherever possible, to provide for their own retirement. This article argues that the security promised amounts to little more than greater means testing and complexity, and that the government's `strengthening' of private pensions actually results in greater risk being transferred to individual savers. The government recognizes some of the problems this approach creates, but its attempts to remedy them are not very credible. Nevertheless, the government will continue on its path because of its determination to reduce the state's role in pension provision. This article suggests that the `New Insurance Contract' is one that individual savers do not fully understand and may ultimately reject.
Subject terms:
pensions, policy formulation, retirement, risk, social policy, benefits, financing;
Social Policy and Administration, 37(1), February 2003, pp.65-81.
Publisher:
Wiley
... with it those to whom the policy applies; that reforms implicitly, if not explicitly, underestimate the importance of “security”; and that failure to conduct a much broader debate about the fundamental notions of work, retirement, saving and security may simply condemn the UK to interminable pension reform.
“Risk” is used by a broad spectrum of interests to discuss a wide range of pension issues in a variety of contexts. The article outlines key theoretical perspectives on the nature and construction, or conceptualization, of risk. Their relevance to debate and policy initiatives, particularly public pension policy, is examined. It is suggested that current government policy is failing to carry with it those to whom the policy applies; that reforms implicitly, if not explicitly, underestimate the importance of “security”; and that failure to conduct a much broader debate about the fundamental notions of work, retirement, saving and security may simply condemn the UK to interminable pension reform.