There are too many pension schemes in the UK and arguably too many regulators too, a leading pensions commentator says, after reforms to master trusts were announced in the Queen’s Speech.

A new Pensions Bill was outlined today, with a raft of pension changes, following on from the March Budget.

Strengthening of the regulation of master trusts was a key focus of the measures outlined today. Read more on this here.

Tom McPhail, head of retirement policy at Hargreaves Lansdown, said these changes were welcome but there was more to be done.

He said: “There are tensions in final salary schemes, where the cumulative deficits add up to an eye-watering £300 billion. The conflicting interests of pension scheme members on the one hand and of shareholders on the other, exist in a state of ongoing instability.

“The Pension Protection Fund acts as an effective safety net, however it is funded by the same schemes it is set up to protect; with the numbers of schemes dwindling all the time, there is a risk of the snake eating its own tail.

“Ultimately, there are too many pension schemes in the UK and arguably too many regulators too. There are thousands of final salary schemes, tens of thousands of money purchase schemes, and dozens of Master Trust and Sipp providers, some of which may not be sustainable in the long term.

“There is also an alphabet soup of regulatory bodies involved, including the FCA, TPR, DWP, HMT, HMRC, BoE, PRA and sundry government committees.”

Yvonne Braun, ABI director of policy, long term savings and protection, said: “We have been calling for some time for the ‘two speed’ system of pension regulation between insurers and trust-based schemes to be tackled.

“Trust-based schemes, including master trusts, do not currently have to comply with insurers' strict requirements, which means they can be set up far too easily.

“This causes unnecessary risks for savers, leaving them vulnerable to scams and dubious investments.”