New pension changes for 20m people in Pension Schemes Bill
Pension changes introduced today could make managing accounts easier for millions of workers planning their retirement across the UK.
The Government's new Pension Schemes Bill is designed to support working people plan for their retirement by making pensions simpler to understand, easier to manage, and drive better value over the long term.
Keeping track of pensions is notoriously challenging, with the average worker accumulating 11 different pension pots over their lifetime.
This has resulted in £26.6 billion in lost pensions across the UK, according to the Pensions Policy Institute and the Association of British Insurers.
One of its biggest benefits is the merging of small pension pots.
The bill also introduces a new system to show how well pension schemes are performing, this will help savers understand whether their scheme is giving them good value and protect them from getting stuck in underperforming schemes for years on end, to help working people feel more secure about their retirement savings.
For those approaching retirement, the changes will mean clear default options for turning savings into a retirement income. This means people will have clearer, more secure routes to decide how they use their pension money over time.
The full changes are listed in detail here.
Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall says: "Hardworking people across the UK deserve their pensions to work as hard for them as they have worked to save, and our reforms will deliver a huge boost to future generations of pensioners."
Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves describes the bill as "a game changer", giving "bigger pension pots for savers and driving £50 billion of investment directly into the UK economy– putting more money into people's pockets."
Government launches plans to automatically combine small pension pots, here's what it's likely to mean for you... https://t.co/GtTdErcABJ
— Martin Lewis (@MartinSLewis) April 24, 2025
What do these pension changes mean for workers?
The bill will transform the £2 trillion pensions landscape to ensure savers get good returns for each pound they save, and drive investment into the economy, through a suite of measures, including:
Requiring DC schemes to prove they are value for money, to protect savers from getting stuck in underperforming schemes.
Simplifying retirement choices, with all pension schemes offering default routes to an income in retirement.
Bringing together small pension pots worth £1,000 or less into one pension scheme that is certified as delivering good value to savers, making pension saving less hassle and more rewarding.
New rules creating multi-employer DC scheme 'megafunds' of at least £25 billion, so that bigger and better pension schemes can drive down costs and invest in a wider range of assets.
Consolidating and professionalising the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS), with assets held in six pools that can invest in local areas infrastructure, housing and clean energy.
Increased flexibility for Defined Benefit (DB) pension schemes to safely release surplus worth collectively £160 billion, to support employers' investment plans and to benefit scheme members.
What is the difference between a Defined Benefit (DB) scheme and a Defined Contribution (DC) pension?
There are two different ways pension schemes work.
With a Defined Benefit (DB) pension scheme, also referred to as final salary pension schemes, the amount you get is usually based on your salary and how long you've been part of the pension scheme.
For a Defined Contribution (DC) pension, the figure you get is based on how much you and your employer invest in the pension and how your investments perform.
Recommended reading:
What's the expert view on the new pension changes?
Nausicaa Delfas, chief executive of The Pensions Regulator (TPR) says: "The Pension Schemes Bill is a once in a generation opportunity to address unfinished business in the UK pension system.
"Making sure all schemes are focused on delivering value for money, helping to stop small, and often forgotten pension pots forming, and guiding savers towards the right retirement products for them, will mean savers benefit from a system fit for the future.
"We have long advocated for fewer, larger well-run schemes with the size and skill to deliver better outcomes for savers. As such we are also pleased to see the proposed legislative framework for DB superfunds, providing options and choice in defined benefit consolidation."
Andy Briggs, CEO, Phoenix Group says: "The bill sets a clear direction for the future of pensions with the emphasis on building scale and ensuring savers receive value for money.
"People across the country will feel the impact of these changes with plans to consolidate small pots, ensure the dashboard delivers and provide default retirement income options at the point of retirement.
Patrick Heath-Lay, Chief Executive, People's Partnership adds: "This is a pivotal moment in pension reform. The bill contains many measures that will require providers to deliver better outcomes for savers and improve the workplace pension system."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wales Online
2 hours ago
- Wales Online
The £6bn rail line argument that masks what you should be really angry about
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info Over the last few days, there has been one hot topic in the world of Welsh politics - a train line which will run between Oxford and Cambridge. Given these two cities are roughly 200 miles from Wales, you can be forgiven for asking why. East West Rail is a railway project which will link Oxford and Cambridge at an estimated cost of £6.6bn. Any money spent on it will trigger extra payments to Scotland and Northern Ireland so they can spend it on their transport systems. But, just as has been the case throughout the HS2 debacle, there won't be any extra money for the Welsh Government. The reason for this is both incredibly simple and reasonable on the surface but devillishly complicated and truly unfair beneath it. It may not necessarily be a scandal in itself. But it symbolises everything that is wrong with how rail funding is allocated in England and Wales. For our free daily briefing on the biggest issues facing the nation, sign up to the Wales Matters newsletter here On the face of it, this issue isn't linked to the spending review that has been happening in Westminster for the last six months or more and of which chancellor Rachel Reeves will stand up in the Commons on Wednesday and deliver the conclusion. Yet it helps shed a light on why that will be enormously complex to understand and why the real story may not be the one you read in headlines that evening. So bear with us while we go through it. The fury from politicians Opposition politicians in Wales have been fulminating about East West rail. They say that the rail line should have been classified as an England-only project like Crossrail so that the Welsh Government would get a guaranteed share. Lib Dem MP David Chadwick said Wales will lose out to the tune of between £306m and £363m as a result. Describing it as another HS2, he said: "Labour expects people across Wales to believe the ridiculous idea that this project will benefit them, and they are justified in not giving Wales the money it needs to improve our own public transport systems. 'It's a disgrace, and it shows there has been no meaningful change since in the way Wales is treated since Labour took power compared to the Conservatives." Plaid Cymru's leader Mr ap Iorwerth took a similar tack, telling plenary: "For all the talk of the UK Government acknowledging somehow that Welsh rail has been historically underfunded, this is some partnership in power." Yet, while there's a lot of truth to what they're saying, it's also much more complicated. Which is where the spending review comes in. Comparability factors There will be so many numbers in the paperwork that accompanies Wednesday's spending review that finding the most important ones isn't straightforward. Yet if you want to know just how much of the England and Wales transport pot is going to be sucked into paying for massive rail projects in England like HS2 (£66bn) or East West rail (£6bn) or all the tram/train projects being promised in England outside London (£15bn), then look out for the overall transport comparability factor for Wales. Very simply, this is the number that the Treasury uses to work out how much the Welsh Government should get for every £1 it spends on transport in England. The reason everyone has been so, so angry about HS2 and the massive billions being poured is that back in 2015, Wales used to get a comparability factor of 80.9%. Yet when the number crunchers in Horse Guards Road sat down to work out how much the Welsh Government should get at the last spending review in 2021, that comparability factor fell to just 33.5%. Ouch. For every £1 spent on transport by Westminster, since the last spending review the Welsh Government has received a population adjusted share (5%) of 33.5%. Or about 1.6p. For context, it used to be around 4p. If Mr Chadwick and Mr Iorwerth are right and the UK government plans to plough even more money into rail in England in the coming years on projects like HS2, East Coast and what the Tories used to call Northern Powerhouse rail, then the new comparability factor that the Treasury mathematicians will conjure up this time could be even lower. But even that is massively misleading. Because if the UK government also promises to plough vast sums into rail in Wales then the comparability factor for the Welsh Government would not rise - it would fall further still. Is your mind boggling yet? We said it was complex. What the Welsh Government wants Because the Welsh Government isn't responsible for rail infrastructure spending, the transport comparability factor really just reflects how much money is going on rail. The less that's spent on rail, the higher a share of the overall transport pot the Welsh Government gets. The more that goes on rail, the lower a share of the overall transport spot the Welsh Government gets. The real problem for Cardiff Bay then is not the comparability factor. Neither is it the fact that East West rail isn't classified as England-only. The problem, as far as the Welsh Government is concerned, is the fact that the England and Wales rail pot itself isn't shared fairly. HS2 and East Coast rail are the symbols of a system that is broken that pours vast sums into English rail projects while Wales misses out. Even if they were classified as England-only, the money would go to the Welsh Government which isn't responsible for rail infrastructure spending. "The way that the system operates at the moment—for years I've been saying—is redundant," Wales' transport minister Ken Skates has said. "The east-west line, which has been in development, I believe, for around about 20 years now, is part of the rail network enhancements pipeline, where everything in a large footprint, a substantial footprint, including Wales, is packaged together. "Where you have all schemes in England and Wales packaged together in what's called the regional network enhancement pipeline it means that projects in Wales are always going to be competing on the business case with projects in affluent areas of the south-east, of London. That means that we are at a disadvantage. "I want to see it change. I've been saying it for years. There's nothing new in this story. I've been saying that we need reform for years and suddenly people have woken up to it." Wales' First Minister Eluned Morgan has said the same. "What we have is a situation where there is a pipeline of projects for England and Wales. Are we getting our fair share? Absolutely not. Are we making the case? Absolutely." "I've made the case very, very clearly that, when it comes to rail, we have been short-changed, and I do hope that we will get some movement on that in the next week from the spending review," she said. What does this mean for the spending review When Rachel Reeves stands up in the Commons on Wednesday, we fully expect she will announce some funding for rail in Wales, as you can see in our piece here, and our expectation is that will be about the rail stations earmarked in the work by Lord Burns after the M4 relief road was axed. They would be in Cardiff East, Parkway, Newport West, Maindy, Llanwern and Magor. But what matters is how much and when - and how that compares to the money being spent in England. Imagine the chancellor announces a few hundred million pounds for those rail stations in Wales in the spending review, what we do not - and will likely not know for many years - is whether that amount is a fair reflection of the mass spending she has announced in England because we know she has also touted £15bn of improvements in England. It will likely take years for academics to assess what kind of share of the rail pot has been spent in Wales. In the past, it certainly has not been fair. In 2018, a Welsh Government commissioned report by Professor Mark Barry estimated that the Network Rail Wales route, which covers 11% of the UK network, received just over 1% of the enhancement budget for the 2011-2016 period. In 2021, the Wales Governance Centre told MPs on the Welsh affairs select committee that had rail been fully devolved to the Welsh Government, Wales would have received an additional £514m for enhancements via Network Rail had rail infrastructure been devolved as it is in Scotland. So when Leeds West and Pudsey MP Ms Reeves gets to her feet in the Commons on Wednesday, you can pretty much guarantee there will at least one or two headlines relevant Wales. But we may not understand what they really mean for a while yet and East West rail won't help us understand either.
South Wales Guardian
2 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
Rayner faces Labour backbench call to ‘smash' existing housebuilding model
Labour's Chris Hinchliff has proposed a suite of changes to the Government's flagship Planning and Infrastructure Bill, part of his party's drive to build 1.5 million homes in England by 2029. Mr Hinchliff has proposed arming town halls with the power to block developers' housebuilding plans, if they have failed to finish their previous projects. He has also suggested housebuilding objectors should be able to appeal against green-lit large developments, if they are not on sites which a council has set aside for building, and put forward a new duty for authorities to protect chalk streams from 'pollution, abstraction, encroachment and other forms of environmental damage'. Mr Hinchliff has told the PA news agency he does not 'want to rebel' but said he would be prepared to trigger a vote over his proposals. He added his ambition was for 'a progressive alternative to our planning system and the developer-led profit-motivated model that we have at the moment'. The North East Hertfordshire MP said: 'Frankly, to deliver the genuinely affordable housing that we need for communities like those I represent, we just have to smash that model. 'So, what I'm setting out is a set of proposals that would focus on delivering the genuinely affordable homes that we need, empowering local communities and councils to have a driving say over what happens in the local area, and also securing genuine protection for the environment going forwards.' Mr Hinchliff warned that the current system results in 'speculative' applications on land which falls outside of councils' local housebuilding strategies, 'putting significant pressure on inadequate local infrastructure'. In his constituency, which lies between London and Cambridge, 'the properties that are being built are not there to meet local need', Mr Hinchliff said, but were instead 'there to be sold for the maximum profit the developer can make'. Asked whether his proposals chimed with the first of Labour's five 'missions' at last year's general election – 'growth' – he replied: 'If we want to have the key workers that our communities need – the nurses, the social care workers, the bus drivers, the posties – they need to have genuinely affordable homes. 'You can't have that thriving economy without the workforce there, but at the moment, the housing that we are delivering is not likely to be affordable for those sorts of roles. 'It's effectively turning the towns into commuter dormitories rather than having thriving local economies, so for me, yes, it is about supporting the local economy.' Mr Hinchliff warned that the 'bottleneck' which slows housebuilding 'is not process, it's profit'. The developer-led housing model is broken. It has failed to deliver affordable homes. Torching environmental safeguards won't fix it—the bottleneck isn't just process, it's profit. We need a progressive alternative: mass council house building in sustainable communities. — Chris Hinchliff MP (@CHinchliffMP) June 6, 2025 Ms Rayner, the Deputy Prime Minister and Housing Secretary, is fronting the Government's plans for 1.5 million new homes by 2029. Among the proposed reforms is a power for ministers to decide which schemes should come before councillors, and which should be delegated to local authority staff, so that committees can 'focus their resources on complex or contentious development where local democratic oversight is required'. Natural England will also be able to draft 'environmental delivery plans (EDPs)' and acquire land compulsorily to bolster conservation efforts. Mr Hinchliff has suggested these EDPs must come with a timeline for their implementation, and that developers should improve the conservation status of any environmental features before causing 'damage' – a proposal which has support from at least 43 cross-party MP backers. MPs will spend two days debating the Bill on Monday and Tuesday. Chris Curtis, the Labour MP for Milton Keynes North, warned that some of Mr Hinchliff's proposals 'if enacted, would deepen our housing crisis and push more families into poverty'. He said: 'I won't stand by and watch more children in the country end up struggling in temporary accommodation to appease pressure groups. No Labour MP should. 'It's morally reprehensible to play games with this issue. 'These amendments should be withdrawn.'
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Starmer goes all in on NHS with PM set to hand health service £30bn spending boost at expense of other public services
Sir Keir Starmer will pump money into the NHS at the expense of other public services. The government is putting all its eggs in one basket as it lines up the Department for Health for a £30billion cash boost at next week's spending review. However, health chiefs have warned the prime minister's promise to 'turbocharge delivery' could lead to difficult compromises elsewhere in services from the police to councils. It comes after the party's unexpected victory in the Hamilton, Larkhall & Stonehouse by-election - though as the threat of Nigel Farage 's Reform UK still looms large. The Department for Health will be handed an increase of around £200billion to its budget by 2028 - a £17billion rise in real terms. Its day-to-day budget is set to increase by 2.8 per cent in real terms annually over the three-year spending review period. Sir Keir has also pledged to have 92 per cent of NHS patients treated within 18 weeks by the next election, a target that has remained unmet for a decade. Currently, under 60 per cent are seen within this time with waiting lists rising to 7.4million last month. There are even fears NHS bosses may not hit an interim goal of 65 per cent next year. Chancellor Rachel Reeves' prioritisation of health has forced cuts in other departments and prompted protestations from other cabinet members like Yvette Cooper, the home secretary and Angela Rayner, the deputy prime minister and housing secretary. Both have warned Ms Reeves the cuts will put some of the government's crime and housing targets at risk amid 'robust negotiations'. But the chancellor has maintained 'not every department will get everything they want'. Overall, the health budget, which stood at £178billion as Labour took office, will exceed £230billion by the next election. The increase means health is set to account for 41 per cent of all day-to-day departmental spending - up from 39 per cent. Ben Zaranko, of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said Ms Reeves's cash boost was 'a serious, meaningful increase in health funding'. But Matthew Taylor, chief executive of the NHS Confederation, warned the funding increase 'is not going to enable us to achieve recovery and reform' without big changes to the way the health service treats patients. He said the government's plan to withhold the budget for infrastructure simultaneously would also make 'combining recovery and reform' impossible.
