Pension funds use our money for political goals, instead of the highest possible return – Joop

Something very strange has leaked from the formation negotiations. A few weeks ago, informants Jut and Jul agreed with the pension funds that their large-scale renovation could continue despite all objections and concerns. In return, the funds promise €25 billion in housing construction, infrastructure and the energy transition. At least that is what EW magazine reports. And otherwise there won’t be a cent.

This is a strange thing in more ways than one. These informateurs are there to help the negotiating partners in the formation write a coalition agreement, not to take on the job themselves. However, that is so far.

The behavior of the pension funds is much more serious. The sole purpose of these funds is to save a decent old-age provision for all participants. They contribute a large part of their salary to this during their working lives. In most cases this is mandatory and applies to the pension fund of your sector, not that of your own choice.

Pension funds invest for a higher return, or rather: they often have this done by asset managers who submit a large bill for this. In 2021 alone €9.3 billion. The question is whether those pension managers will pay for themselves. They are always winners because even if the result is negative, they send a receipt.

Participants can expect the fund managers to do everything they can to fill the pension pot as much as possible. They must ensure that their money is invested as lucratively as possible. In that context, only ethical restrictions may exist. For example, you may decide that you should ignore the cigarette factories on principled grounds. Despite the gold lying in front of their doors.

Lobbyists and politicians like to cast a covetous eye on the pension billions. They want to channel investments in the direction of their own interests. For example, directors are now being pressured to invest in the arms industry because of the Russian threat. In general, administrators resist such lobbyists and politicians because their only reason for existence is to raise funds for the participants.

Now, however, the pension funds appear prepared to commit €25 billion to achieving a specific goal: not to be bothered by a total renovation of the system. In this context, eight to ten million separate pension pots must be created in the coming years, one for each participant, and these must then be managed separately. In jargon, this is called ‘sailing in’ and experts fear that this will get terribly out of hand, at least due to a combination of staff shortages and IT problems.

Some politicians want to slow down this process or even nip it in the bud before it has properly begun. Critics of the reform include BBB, PVV and NSC. Only the VVD is in favor. What are the pension funds doing now? They present the negotiating partners with a sausage: just €25 billion to do nice things. It appears, according to EW, that Wilders and Van der Plas have already succumbed to this temptation. Please note: the 25 billion will only come if the funds are not wasted at all.

This is abuse of the deposit by the participants. The money is spent not on business but on political grounds. The proceeds for the participants do not come first but last. It borders on blackmail. It is also a form of mismanagement.

Lay people do not have the detailed knowledge to make a balanced judgment about the benefits and dangers of the new system, although it is a bad sign that many experts on the subject claim that they do not fully understand it themselves. Including Pieter Omtzigt. Apart from that, it remains unacceptable that pension funds use your and my money for political lobbies instead of the highest possible return

For the rest, I am of the opinion that the surcharge scandal should not disappear from public attention, nor should the affair surrounding Groningen natural gas, even though the last well has now been closed.

Listen The Memory Palace, the weekly podcast by Han van der Horst and John Knieriem about politics and history. Now: the Gaza demonstrations at the universities.