Well, well, well, the Strawman has grown up to be Woodenman and he has scarcely changed in the formative process. Was the consultation purely lip service? About the only ground that is shifting is the tax treatment, and boy did that need changing. Strawman was an SSIA approach with the benefits tax free. I think they have dropped that but they remain rather coy about the howler.
But it is the approach to investments that condemns Woodenman. Colm has proposed a radical solution, obviously too radical. But we should split Colm's approach into two distinct aspects:
1) real assets are the correct investment vehicle not only pre retirement but also substantially into retirement.
2) short/medium term volatility can be substantially smoothed out
I presume it is (2) which is too radical so I will concentrate on (1). Surely nobody believes that 100% in cash at retirement is the correct investment strategy. Yet that naiveté named "lifestyling" has survived from Strawhood to Woodenhood. It is unclear whether default funds will be required to be lifestyle. That would condemn 99% of folk to be in the wrong assets at retirement. So let's presume that providers are allowed to have a more sensible default fund along Colm's lines but that there is a mix of approaches - some providers do lifestyling, others do sensible.
Now we come to the most bizarre childish trait of all to survive - the thrill of the carousel. Except this is no merry ground - on the throw of a dice 99% of people will be directed either "lifestyle" or "sensible". This is sheer nonsense
Thankfully, I agree with Steve Barret, this will never get off the ground in a small market like Ireland on 0.5% p.a.
Is it too much to hope that by 2022 we will have a sensible Ironwoman?