A false narrative has been created around the implementation options for the pensions dashboards.

The choice is not between single and multiple, but between regulated and unregulated or, safe and unsafe.

Decreeing that there should only be one dashboard hosted by the SFGB will not make it so when ‘unofficial’ services are already starting to emerge via a combination of direct connections and use of unsafe screen scraping technology.

Frustration over a lack of choice or functionality could lead to the emergence of an unsafe, unregulated market with little or no regulatory oversight and no common standards.

This is why a wide variety of organisations have endorsed the model put forward in the DWP feasibility study.

The best way to empower and protect consumers is to build a system based on secure technology, based upon agreed standards with strong regulatory oversight.

This is exactly what the ABI-led cross-industry project proposed and is the model that endorsed by Which?.

If properly implemented this model will ensure that only those who can prove both their technical expertise as well as their fitness and propriety will be able to offer dashboard-type services.

This is the model that is being used to great effect by the Open Banking initiative.

Pension savers are an ever-expanding and increasingly diverse population and the idea that one single central service could cater for all of their needs is misguided.

Share Story: