You argue (editorial 10 January) for compulsory private pensions to deal with the disincentives created by means-testing of state benefits. This would certainly improve on the present situation but could well be regarded as a back-door tax – the reason for the Government’s reluctance to make stakeholder pensions compulsory in the first place! A better solution would be to set the (universal) basic state pension at the same level as the (means tested) Minimum Income Guarantee. If we are going to have to pay more, wouldn’t we get better value and more security by improving the state scheme? A nationwide poll, carried out last year for the Post Office, found that 63% of people want the Government to improve the current state pension.

January 2002                                                                                            

Home