The most ambitious recommendation in the report of the National Pensions Policy Initiative, which came out last May, and is now under consideration by the Government, was the creation of a universal personal pension plan, to be known as a Personal Retirement Savings Account (PRSA). PRSAs would be bought by anyone without access to a fully funded occupational pension scheme: workers in the private or public service who wanted to top up their contributions to make up for lost service or benefits; the self-employed; contract and part-time workers and even the unemployed who could continue to make contributions to their PRSA (or take one out) and stack up unused tax credits for the day within a limited period when they would be back at work. This latter provision is especially significant to women who take career breaks to raise their families at home but are forced to abandon existing pension plans.

The provision of a "kitemark" for the PRSAs a quality mark to identify those contracts which met the design standards set by the Pensions Board, and in particular the charges structure of them, is something that independent financial advisers have welcomed. It will apply as much to executive pensions designed for high income clients and sourced by a professional adviser, as well as to straightforward plans purchased across the counter at the Post Office or building society.

Mr Owen Morton, a director of Moneywise Financial Planning in Dublin is enthusiastic about kitemarking because it provides, he says, for flexibility, accessibility, confidence, transparency and simplicity, which he neatly sums up as an appropriate acronym, FACTS. "Transparency is probably the single most important issue, in that it is clouding the issues which primarily induce jargon. If something stacks up, it can reasonably be explained in uncomplicated language," says Mr Morton. "When PRSAs come on stream, they will trawl an ocean of sophisticated potential buyers, with, hopefully jargon-free, what-you-see-is-what-you-get, value-for-money pension plans."

But to guarantee the "value-for-money" aspect, the kitemark needs to be accompanied by what he describes as a "benchmark" which will establish the ideal pension fund return that is, "a comparable investment fund where no charges were incurred. The task is to draw as close to this imaginary amount as is feasible. To do this the charge must be spelled out and must be sustainable. It must be seen to offer value for money."

To this end, Moneywise has introduced a new product, the Moneywise Harvester Plan, which it is describing as a prototype of the PRSA, and a stop-gap until the PRSAs begin, probably no sooner than two years from now given the necessary legislative work that needs to be done. According to Mr Morton, this new product will offer four different product profiles from different providers to accommodate individual preference and risk tolerance. A computer model of each product will show how they compare against the benchmark and each other. The "all-rounder [choice] is for the long haul, a top three performer with low management charges," he explains. "The next, `sexy-spice' is successful and brash, a top performer with moderate charges; the `diverse' choice will be for the upwardly and late rally mobile, with options to spread investment and move around without hassle and the `steady Eddie' is for those who want added security, especially within striking range of retirement." The model also shows a traditional, front-loaded contract.

Mr Morton's benchmark example is a nil-charges fund into which £7,500 (indexed) is contributed every year for 20 years. Its final accumulated value, at a steady annual growth rate of 9 per cent, is £603,134. The top performing (but higher risk) option, if it outperforms its rivals by just 0.75 per cent would come within 5 per cent of the benchmark and a final fund of nearly £573,000, while the conservative, "steady-Eddie" fund might fall short by as much as 22 per cent and a fund of £472,000. The traditional, front-loaded contract, which is still being widely sold, falls 17 per cent below the benchmark with a final fund of £500,528.

The Harvester Plan is a fees-only payment contract. Moneywise will charge 5 per cent of annual investment contributions or a minimum of £360.00 per annum. Total fee for a 20-year fund like the one highlighted here (with contributions of about £250,000) would be approximately £12,500, a fair sum for truly independent, on-going professional advice.

For more information about pension benchmarking, Moneywise Financial Planning can be reached at (01) 670 5937 or contact your own independent financial adviser.