Government Pensions Dashboard

GrumpyDil

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82008500#Comment_82008500

Possibly that the pension is quoted from 2039 so the calculation will include 13 years of growth and might include an assumption about ongoing contributions.

QQQQQQQQ_Y

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82008444#Comment_82008444

What they're doing is cross-matching the person's NI to their own database. This remains Database 101 - whether the data is loaded/transformed within one database or done via a real-time/on-the-fly for a single record to multiple dispersed systems. All that was required technically was a standards agreement for the data fields, how that data may be presented, and the transport protocols.

The other obstacle would be the agreement between the parties to share the data. Technically, this is bread and butter stuff for anybody familiar with data warehousing.

I am still at a loss as to why it should take the better part of 20 years for such a simple system.

PensionsStuff

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82008619#Comment_82008619

You realise, amongst acting like your the most knowledgeable person in the world, this hasn't been going out for 20 years... right ?

The idea was first discussed back around that time, but in no way shape or form progressed, the current general idea of the dashboard actually was again put forward in 2014.

Government commitments were then in place from around 2017 or so which included a prototype, waiting on the 2021 act to pass to put it in legislation, and then the dashboards regulation in 2022 requiring schemes to act.

So in reality, its been at best since 2021 for the government and pension providers to actuslly be moving forward with resources, commitments and time frames.

AlwaysLearnin

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82008599#Comment_82008599

It appears to suggest there will be a £2.54m pot, producing £161k p/y in 2039…!

hyubh

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82008619#Comment_82008619

'What they're doing is cross-matching the person's NI to their own database.'

What each scheme (or in practice their Dashboard ISP) is doing is cross matching potentially a range of data items - see here for the full list:

https://www.pensionsdashboardsprogramme.org.uk/standards/data-standards#Finddata(reference)

It is down the scheme to define what it will use. The MoneyHelper Dashboard (or OneLogin) doesn't see the personal details held by the scheme, rather the scheme matches to the details provided by the Dashboard/OneLogin.

'This remains Database 101 - whether the data is loaded/transformed within one database or done via a real-time/on-the-fly for a single record to multiple dispersed systems.'

Pensions Dashboard hasn't been late coming because people have forgotten the syntax for a SQL join…

All that was required technically was a standards agreement for the data fields, how that data may be presented, and the transport protocols.

That has all been done.

The other obstacle would be the agreement between the parties to share the data. Technically, this is bread and butter stuff for anybody familiar with data warehousing.

Data is not being shared in some massive data warehouse! This really isn't the civil liberties and data protection disaster zone you assume 😉

I am still at a loss as to why it should take the better part of 20 years for such a simple system.

There hasn't been 20 years of development. While the system currently in testing has formally been in the works for 5 years, that's only because the previous government put everything on hold for the general election, and the current government has been in no hurry to enable general availability. Frankly, unless there is a highly committed pensions minister in place, there is little incentive to flick the switch, the risk of being blamed for another government IT disaster (regardless of the facts on the ground) are too high. Any given pensions minister ('Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Pensions') is only in post for a short while - the current government is already on its second.

QQQQQQQQ_Y

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82008726#Comment_82008726

And in that time Palantir have taken over much more complicated and extensive data sets covering the NHS, and started building all the interfaces needed for multiple different health authorities - today been turned down for management of a Met dataset (whilst having contracts with at least two other police authorities). But two governments later on we're still at the pilot stage for a pensions dashboard - which is technically very much simpler than either of the above.

QQQQQQQQ_Y

"Data is not being shared in some massive data warehouse! This really isn't the civil liberties and data protection disaster zone you assume 😉"

As I've never stated it was I'm puzzled as to why you think I said it was some "civil liberties and data protection disaster zone". But we'll let that go and put it down to a misreading on your part.

Perhaps you could offer some explanation why, what is a relatively simple technical exercise, should take so long and have produced so little after such an extensive gestation. More importantly, why we should accept such a miserable failure.

hyubh

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82008943#Comment_82008943

You missed the smiley…

As it wasn't obvious - I do not think you believe Pensions Dashboard to be 'a civil liberties and data protection disaster zone'. In fact quite the opposite - as you continue to insinuate the main hold up has been government unfamiliarity with the SQL join syntax, I think you have a radical lack of concern for civil liberties and data protection considerations, whether real or (from a government minister's point of view) potentially imagined by the media.

'that it is still only just at the pilot stage is quite staggering'

It's basically all there, just not with full access - most schemes (and all schemes of any substantive size) are actually connected and processing find requests through their ISPs. And call me an industry shill if you like, but personally I think from an end user perspective the UI design of the MoneyHelper Dashboard is pretty good - it's a tough gig presenting DB and DC schemes in a consistent, generic fashion. If it were down to me, I'd speed up opening the thing to full public access, not push it back yet again. However I'm not a junior minister in an unpopular government…

PS - while the mechanics of matching individuals to pension memberships has not been the big blocker you seem to assume, that's not to say it hasn't been subject to discussion. Significantly, it was the government that stressed early on that NI numbers can't be considered the be all and end all, and indeed shouldn't even be assumed at all. It's then been on the pensions industry to do the work to fit into government requirements - the current PASA guidance is here if you're interested:

https://www.pasa-uk.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/PASA-Data-Matching-Convention-DMC-guidance-FINAL.pdf.

(PASA = The Pensions Administration Standards Association, an industry body)

hyubh

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82008947#Comment_82008947

Let's say the government announced tomorrow they were hiring Palantir to implement a centralised pension dashboard, and as part of the implementation, will be mandating all pension schemes to give the company direct access to the personal data they hold. Do you not think that might not get… some pushback…?

sandsy

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82008500#Comment_82008500

For a DC pot, it's based on a level single life annuity, as if the individual had reached their retirement age, and assumes no tax free cash is taken - same as an annual benefit statement.