The key thing is that under the new regime everyone with a 35-year national insurance record will know exactly what they can expect: £144 a week in today’s money.
In one fell swoop the government will do away with means-testing for anyone retiring after April 2017.
Those who save for retirement will know that their saving will be rewarded. Those that cannot afford to save will get a bigger pension without having to fill in confusing forms.
Yes, there will be losers. Public sector workers and others in final salary schemes will have to pay more national insurance.
But in the case of the public sector, at least, this is removing a double subsidy by the taxpayer.
If I had a gripe it would be that employers running final salary pension schemes will lose their lower national insurance rates: surely such commitment to your workforce deserves financial recognition?
The big winners will be the lower paid and self-employed. The latter have for years paid national insurance and received precious little in return – so this is righting a long-term wrong.
The return of minimum contribution record to get a pension seems sensible.
One group of people who could be rubbing their hands with glee are those who had the foresight to opt-out of Serps for a few years and place their national insurance money in an appropriate personal pension.
After years of the “should you” or “shouldn’t you” opt-out debate, the right answer appears to have been “opt-out” for a time.
The extra NI paid by those who stayed in will not in some cases be enough to boost their pension past the £144 foundation point.
Those who chose the APP will, if they can still achieve 35 years opted in, receive the full £144 plus the extra in their personal pension.
No doubt there will be plenty more debate about cliff edges and fairness before the new pension comes in.
But Steve Webb the pensions minister has performed a remarkable job in creating the most equitable and elegant solution with the money available.
Steve Webb has performed a remarkable job in creating the most equitable and elegant solution with the money available.----------------------------------------------------------------
Time to act
In my days as a full time employee of the Daily Mail I suggested we run a feature on Gordon Brown called The Schizophrenic Chancellor.
The piece highlighted how, with great regularity, he was espousing prudence and savings while his policies ran in the opposite direction.
I cannot make the same charge against the current government – but I can say that announcing a policy is not the same as enacting it.
And this government is developing a worrying habit of taking the plaudits without fulfilling the pledges in a timely fashion.
The latest example is the increase to income drawdown levels. Hurrah, we all shouted when the news was announced.
But it was lacking one very important detail: when that change would take place.
Another is the cap on long-term care costs.
The Dilnot Commission in July 2011 suggested a cap of £35,000.
The Coalition partners have reiterated their support for Dilnot - when the cap will come and at what level it will be set remains a mystery.
These are policies that will have a massive impact on the lives of those affected.
To flick proposals into the air and raise hopes without giving a start date was a game favoured by a previous chancellor.
The Coalition should play fairer with the electorate.
______________________________________________________
Omen for Isas
If you want evidence of just how much damage the Government’s Funding for Lending scheme has inflicted on savers look no further than the best buy tables.
Want a long-term fixed rate for an Isa? Look no further than Halifax paying 2.5 per cent for five years or 2.4 per cent for four years.
We now have the ludicrous situation where easy access pays more than a four-year fix.
Whatever happened to the premium savers earned for locking their money away?
I cannot believe that Halifax is doing any business at all in this product. It is merely there so the bank can claim it has a five-year offering.
The only certainty it offers savers is that they will earn the square of not a lot for half a decade.
If Halifax does not want to offer a product it should pull out of the market instead of offering these ridiculous rates.
Can the bank really be said to be treating fairly any customer who takes these four and five-year fixes?
This is an ill-omen for the cash Isa season when banks and building societies tend to offer their best rates.
If the 2 to 2.75 per cent currently on offer is the shape of things to come then the prospects for savers look dire indeed.
Tony Hazell writes for the Daily Mail’s Money Mail Section. He can be contacted at tony.hazell@ymail.com
.png?source=design-system&width=126)