In some ways….I am a bit of a creature of habit.

So much so that I can tell you about a ‘typical Thursday’. It normally looks like this…

A day ‘in the office’, then home for Dinner (or as we used to call it when I was a kid “Tea”) and Pointless, then a couple of hours playing with the kids, then Sophie’s bath time, then a couple of hours writing a blog or reading a book….

….then I’ll settle down to watch Question Time.

Now the routine might vary slightly. Sometimes there’s a “power nap” after dinner, or Cassie does Sophie’s or I’ll catch up on some work instead of reading or writing.

However (and with the exception of being out for the evening or away at an conference or event) the routine tends to be pretty stable….

….and it usually always includes (if it’s on) Question Time (or QT for short!)

I’m interested in political discourse. I don’t naturally sit on one side or the other (I’ve got traditionally right wing opinions in some areas and traditionally left wing opinions on others)

However I like to keep in touch with what the individuals who play a part in creating the set of rules we all live and work under.

I also like David Dimbleby’s style (in my opinion he’s like the stern but friendly teacher you wished you, but never actually, had).

I missed last weeks episode (broadcast on the 5th of December 2013) due to not following my standard routine and being out on the Thursday.

However I managed to catch up with it over the weekend (yep, I political programs over the weekend. I sure know how to live!) and based on the massive demand on the specific type of work I’m doing at the moment, it got me wondering…

Why are politicians seemingly ignoring employer duties and automatic enrolment.

It’s strange. The change impacting all employers and employees in the UK seems to be “on the QT”, due to the fact it’s never on QT!

The latest episode of QT (being the one after the chancellors autumn statement) was full of statements like “We all need to work longer” or “We all need to take ownership and save more” or “You now have to retire at 68 or 69 or 70”.

All those things are true however there is also the fact that longer term having quasi compulsion (in the form of the new employer duties and automatic enrolment obligations) has the opportunity to play an initially small but ever increasing role in ensuring every employee in the country has the opportunity (with employer support) to save for their financial futures.

However in an episode of the most prominent political show in the UK the fact that we are in the middle of a huge positive pensions change which will engage millions into saving for their retirement for the first time was (and is consistently) ignored (or being kept on the QT).

There could be a number of reasons why politicians seemingly forget to mention one of the largest drivers of pension engagement in the UK every time they get a public platform. I’ve come up with 3 possible reasons….

1) Although the regulation is right…..it just isn’t popular enough.

As humans we like quick wins and the deferment of pain.

The employer duties are about longer term wins (building up a fund for many years in advance) and accepting the pain (saving money we could spend today) straight away.

When you’re in a 4 to 5 year political cycle there isn’t ever going to be a great time to mention that you want people to defer pleasure now for a benefit in 10, 20 or 40 years time (even if it’s the right thing to do).

2) Politicians have underestimated the size and scope of this change

Like many of us, politicians are busy people with full agendas.

Although many of the same politicians passed the law to implement the duties which are now laws (including automatic enrolment regulation) back in 2008 they may have underestimated the impact of these rules and therefore moved onto the next piece of legislation (and left it to the pensions regulator and other authority bodies to implement).

However if this is the case and believe it’s now “job done” are wrong. There’s still loads of work for employers, The Pensions Regulator and Professionals to do.

I’m just wondering how many politicians understand the fact that this change in pension law potentially has the greatest impact to the largest number of people than any other law since the implementation of the state pension back in 1908.

3) “It’s not my job guv”

You could argue that a politicians job isn’t to let us know what changes in upcoming law will impact us.

I’d argue the opposite. I want to know from our countries elected representatives what changes are being made and how they will impact me (regardless of whether they are already written in law or not).

However I’m not sure politicians see it in the same way. Maybe it’s down to politicians to debate and establish law at the time and leave it to either regulators and professionals in a particular sector or industry to communicate the changes.

Whether it’s one of these 3 reasons or something else….I’m still confused

Automatic Enrolment and the employer duties are a massive change for employers and employees alike….I’m just concerned that politicians aren’t also spreading the message as well as they should.