Pay rise or not, why don’t MPs have to have their pension with Nest or is it not good enough for the likes of them?

Intriguing that in the MPs’ salary debate, a move to a career average system from a final salary one, is seen as something MPs would concede in return for more money. That sounds okay but it also involves them contributing substantially less (teachers take note). Anyway I made the following argument today wearing a journalistic hat for a consumer audience on Mindful Money. I suggested that since MPs are currently debating pension legislation which will see most people in DC of some form, that perhaps they should be in DC too.

Having mulled this a little further and given the news about the lifting of Nest restrictions and the fact the OFT is now worrying away at AE pensions set up under commission, perhaps MPs should automatically be entered into Nest, and quite obviously with no advice attached unless they were prepared to pay for it.

The ultimate in alignment of interests between elected and electorate. And it could be in return for a pay rise obviously if everyone else in the UK gets a pay rise too. Fair enough surely?

  • AlanWilkins

    It is a national scandal that MP’s enjoy a pension scheme beyond the dreams of most of us. They should be enrolled in NEST and the current MP’s scheme ditched. I wonder if we might then get some joined up thinking on the pensions mess. For our MP’s to be totally detached from the ridiculous system the rest of us are forced into is plain wrong.

    The past and current MP’s have made a total mess of pensions and pension saving in this country, and that mess doesn’t affect them! I am afraid I would give them contributions equivalent to the annual national average DC pension contribution for each year they serve and let them buy a pension with that.

    I wonder if the system might then find itself sorted out. The pension system is a mess, and the MP’s pension scheme is beyond belief and needs to end.