The Government needs a clear communications policy to cut through the pensions spin.
On Monday, the Government finally announced the new flat-rate pension State pension proposals. Put simply, the changes will see the weekly state pension payment increase to £144 (plus inflation rises), from the mooted implementation date of 2017. So far, so good.
What happened next was a communications disaster.
Over the dispatch box, pensions minister Steve Webb exchanged verbal blows with his shadow counterpart, Gregg McClymont. Naturally, Webb went to great lengths to highlight how certain people will benefit from the proposals. In turn, McClymont disagreed.
"For the first time ever," wrote Webb to sceptical Liberal Democrat activists, "we will be bringing the self-employed fully into the State pension system." Responding in Parliament, McClymont, called the changes "unfair," pinpointing the inevitable National Insurance hikes as the primary source of his discomfort.
In short, Parliament was split. Then, the vested interests grabbed their moment.
OAP groups called the proposals a "con trick," trade unions said they were "angry" and, to confuse matters further, Labour said any new policy should be adopted in 2016, not 2017. On the other side of the fence, the Institute for Fiscal Studies praised the "welcome simplification" offered by the reforms.
The outcome? For those actually affected by the proposals, the changes were as clear as mud.
As with most pension proposals, there will ultimately be some winners and some losers. But, if you're searching for reliable, accurate and clear information about how pension changes will affect you personally; public mud-slinging matches are seldom the best places to look.
That is, of course, if people decide to search at all.
Analysis of the figures unveiled in the Governments white paper shows that low and medium earners could find themselves between £500 and £2,000 a year worse off as a result of the new proposals. These aren't just small, insignificant figures. This is real money, for real people. And yet, the Government doesn't say a word.
An official Government press release, on the Department for Work and Pensions' website, does little to allay these concerns.
Indeed, so pre-occupied with spin are ministers, that the press release dedicates five paragraphs to glowing comment from politicians, industry insiders and pension experts. That's five paragraphs of vital space, over half of the press release, wasted.
When Governments make important changes like this, the average worker doesn't care what company directors and banks feel about the proposals. They want to know how their National Insurance contributions will increase, how much they will receive at retirement, how long they will have to work for and, most importantly, whether they are better or worse off than before.
The decision to go ahead with the proposals has already been made. The public know this. Rather than softening up the proposals with a comforting blanket of spin, the Government should be clear, transparent and just say it how it is. But then, what else do we expect from politicians? Perhaps clear and effective accountability, willingness to lead the nation, transparency and integrity would be a good starting point...
Written by Chris Powers, communications co-ordinator, SHILLING Communication
