.png)
Actually, let me rephrase the question: does anyone know what the single financial guidance body was?
As I am sure you aware, it was the name of the joint body that replaced the Money Advice Service, the Pensions Advisory Service and Pension Wise.
Now it will be become the Money and Pensions Service in April.
Staff at the body – which is funded by levies on the financial services industry and pension schemes – will remain at their desks.
It follows that they could have saved an awful lot of time and effort by just switching to the new name back in January rather than going through with the farce of operating as the single financial guidance body for three months.All that will actually change will be the name. But that will not be simply be a case of chucking away a bit of outdated branded stationery or a few business cards. It will mean scrapping the website singlefinancialguidancebody.org.uk and replacing it with moneyandpensionsservice.org.uk.
I am not an expert in the cost of doing that, but I predict it must be a few bob.
Folk who have been involved in similar processes tell me that, depending on the complexity, setting up a website like that could cost as much as £100,000 or more.
And they would have been forced to splash out that sort of expense when they launched their new website in January, as well as when they launch their new, new website next month.
Whatever the actual amount (and I am sure the Money and Pensions Service will be in touch to correct me if my back-of-a-fag-packet calculations are far out), it sounds like yet another needless waste of our money.
Let us face it, the eventual name of the new joint body is a fairly obvious one.
The brain-storming meeting when their boffins came up with the name probably went something like this:
“So what shall we call it?”
“Well, it’s a service that covers money and pensions…”
“The Money and Pensions Service?”
“Perfect. Let’s have another pint.”
In short, they could have avoided the preposterously-named single financial guidance body altogether.
Interestingly, the website moneyandpensionsservice.org.uk was registered back in September, some three months before the single financial guidance body appeared.
If that was done by someone in the organisation that would suggest they already had an inkling of what the renamed body would be called.
It follows that they could have saved an awful lot of time and effort by just switching to the new name back in January rather than going through with the farce of operating as the single financial guidance body for three months.
It means the new body – the Money and Pensions Service not the single financial guidance body – will not be having much of a fresh start, when it desperately needed one.
That is because its predecessor was beset with problems.
One of the biggest issues was its name, which particularly jarred in the adviser community.
The sticking point was the word ‘advice’ as the body did not offer advice, only guidance.
It is good they have carefully swerved that problem with the new name.
But the Money Advice Service came in for much wider criticism than that.
It was much criticised for spending tens of millions on marketing rather than using the cash to give direct help to people who need it.
It had an annual budget of £80m, which an influential committee of MPs went public in slamming at one stage, saying the body was “not fit for purpose”.
MPs condemned the “excessive pay” of senior staff while Treasury research revealed that few members of the public had even heard of it, despite the colossal sums spent on marketing.
The criticism spurred the Money Advice Service into turning itself into a much better organisation and under new leadership it scrapped its expensive advertising campaigns and instead focused on more important areas, such as financial capability and financial education.
Full disclosure here, I was paid by the Money Advice Service to host roundtables and speak at events when it pursued this mission in earnest.
So when former chancellor George Osborne used his last Budget in 2016 to announced the body would be closed and eventually merged with the Pensions Advisory Service and Pension Wise, it came a couple of years too late, in my opinion.
By then it was actually beginning to provide a useful service that was capable of helping to make a difference to vulnerable people.
That is the challenge that the new Money and Pensions Service must now take on.
One role, like its predecessor, it can not fulfil is that of a qualified financial adviser.
The Money and Pensions Service should help people make the right decisions about their money, whether they have debt problems, or need to think about the importance of saving for the future.
Their efforts should complement the work that financial advisers across the country do, in helping people make the most of their financial opportunities.
Together that could yet help Britain end up more financially informed and ultimately wealthier.
Simon Read is a freelance journalist
