Pensions reform needed to encourage public service delivery, says CFDG

Finance | Gareth Jones | 16 Jun 2011

The CFDG has called for the government to reform the Fair Deal policy, saying that it must be changed if charities are to be more involved in public service delivery.

The finance directors' body has responded to the Treasury's consultation on the rules, which dictate that charities taking over public services must give the staff they take on equivalently-sized pensions.

According to CFDG, this has resulted in charities either inheriting unmanageable pension liabilities or refraining for bidding for contracts to avoid these risks.

The response warns that the Fair Deal can result in a two-tier or multi-tier workforce with varying standards of pension provision.

It adds that local authorities often refrain from giving full details of their pensions liabilities in a timely fashion, if at all, and many charities do not have specialist pensions knowledge and are ill-equipped to assess their options fully.

CFDG suggests that one alternative could be for charities to be given Admitted Body Status with a pass-through arrangement, whereby staff would stay within their public sector pension scheme but the charity would pay an agreed contribution.

Caron Bradshaw (pictured), CFDG’s CEO, said: “Aside from the practical problems with Fair Deal, which our response outlines, the policy serves to deter many would-be providers capable of providing specialist, value for money services.

“In a recent survey of our members involved in public service delivery, 48 per cent said that they had been put off from bidding for contracts because of the risk of liabilities – almost all said that the biggest of these risks was pension liabilities.”

Directory: Charity Finance Directors' Group (CFDG)
Who's Who: Caron Bradshaw

Comments

[Cancel] | Reply to:

Name *

Email *

Organisation

Job Title

Comments *

Verification *

* Please read our Community Standards

Close »

Community Standards

The civilsociety.co.uk community and comments board is intended as a platform for informed and civilised debate.

We hope to encourage a broad range of views, however, there are standards that we expect commentators to uphold. We reserve the right to delete or amend any comments that do not adhere to these standards.

We welcome:

Robust but respectful debate
Strongly held opinions
Intelligent relevant discussion
The sharing of relevant experiences
New participants

We will not publish:

Rude, threatening, offensive, obscene or abusive language, or links to such material
Links to commercial organisations or spam postings. The comments board is not an advertising platform
The posting of contact details for yourself or others
Comments intended for malicious purpose or mindless abuse
Comments purporting to be from another person or organisation under false pretences
Gratuitous criticism, commentary or self-promotion
Any material which breaches copyright or privacy laws, or could be considered libellous
The use of the comments board for the pursuit or extension of personal disputes

Be aware:

Views expressed on the comments board are left at users’ discretion and are in no way views held or supported by Civil Society Media
Comments left by others may not be accurate, do not rely on them as fact
You may be misunderstood - sarcasm and humour can easily be taken out of context, try to be clear

Please:

Enjoy the opportunity to express your opinion and respect the right of others to express theirs
Confine your remarks to issues rather than personalities

Together we can keep our community a polite, respectful and intelligent platform for discussion.