11 years of rogue salesmen and ever-generous readers

This comment will be my last as Personal Finance Editor on The Observer as I will shortly be leaving the newspaper, and I ask readers to indulge me today in some reflection.

When I took on this job in 1993 Britain was emerging from an economic slump and the housing market was still on its knees. Of course, it all seems like yesterday's news, but while much has changed in the world of personal finance, much has also - sadly - stayed the same. Apart from dramatic changes in the economy, the overriding shift has been the strengthening of regulation aimed at protecting consumers. Financial services legislation had been introduced barely five years before I arrived at The Observer and although it had flushed out some of the worst rogues in the business there were still problems.

The tragedy of the ensuing decade was the revelation that unfair practices appeared to be virtually systemic. Hardly a major name in the investment industry escaped censure by the regulators or criticism from customers. Too often, directors and management appear to have had little idea of what their staff were up to and no regard for the consequences of putting them under too much pressure to sell, sell, sell.

Recent changes to regulation in the industry, aimed at increasing the accountability of management and helping consumers to compare prices, may help. But I fear that it will take years to rebuild confidence and that regulators will struggle to contain the propensity of the industry to misbehave while commission remains one of the main ways to pay a sales force.

A more recent tragedy is the massive weakening in the strength of employers' pension schemes and the collapse of hundreds where employers have gone bust. For once, the issue is not unscrupulous salesmen; pension funds have been undermined by a combination of legislation - new and existing - dramatic changes in economic conditions and increased longevity. The government is attempting to repair some of the damage with a compensation scheme for workers' pensions although I fear that it will be inadequate and many who have saved diligently for retirement face poverty.

I believe that the weak nesses in employers' pension schemes, the bedrock of private saving for millions of people, will cause individuals and employers to question this method of financial provision. This is definitely not a signal to readers that they should abandon pension saving through employers but a suggestion that we should consider whether it makes sense to put so many eggs in this basket.

In any case, the role of employers in providing pensions will decrease in future, although their responsibility in ensuring that a proportion of workers' earnings be directed automatically to long-term savings should not.

The faults that have been revealed in occupational pensions underline the difficulty of trying to create personal financial certainty in an uncertain world. Trends that economic consensus deems desirable, such as low and stable interest rates and inflation, can have unforeseen effects on people's savings.

Despite all the systems in place to sort out these problems as they arise, some of the oldest adages hold good; spread your risk, caveat emptor, remember that the past is no guide to the future and if it looks too good to be true it probably is.

There are no easy answers or remedies for consumers although, if nothing else, events of the last decade will have instilled a deep sense of caution and scepticism. This may make people less likely in future to sign up for financial products without asking what could go wrong.

Through all of this, the media - including The Observer, of course - has done its best to highlight the shortcomings of poor financial products. One of the most satisfying aspects of editing The Observer's personal finance section has been highlighting problems or injustices, particularly where this has resulted in redress. Often I have also felt that the media, ourselves included, could have done even more to expose scandals before they resulted in loss to consumers. In common with many industries, newspapers are now under pressure to perform to tight financial constraints and I regret that this has left fewer resources than journalists need to investigate and campaign.

My wish list for the British public would be for a financial services industry where everyone, from shop floor to boardroom, exercises personal responsibility in the marketing of products. Politicians should have more regard for the complexity they conjure up with each new wave of legislation, which creates a breeding ground for fraud and sharp practice.

If the financial services industry has been a less-than-uplifting one to write about, the same cannot be said for the readers who have contributed so much to The Observer's personal finance coverage. I am grateful for the many intelligent insights, criticisms and suggestions that you have contributed and to the willingness of so many to share the details of their finances to help others.

I have also been struck by the number of readers for whom personal financial gain has come second in their lives to serving others. The Observer seems to have more than its share of people who have done voluntary or charity work here and abroad or worked in relatively low-paid public sector jobs; often they have sought advice and information in middle age when forced to face the future in a society that emphasises personal financial responsibility more heavily than in the past.

I am also indebted to many colleagues on the staff of The Observer, including Neasa MacErlean and Jill Insley (who takes over as editor), and also to our freelance writers and the colleagues who work behind the scenes to produce Cash each week. Thank you also to the many industry professionals who have so readily passed on their knowledge over the years. I am leaving The Observer to try a new lifestyle in New Zealand which, I hope, will include some writing for British publications. Thank you all for 11 unforgettable years.