The FSA believes safeguards in place will prevent mis-selling
Details of new, low-cost pensions and investment plans have been revealed by the Financial Services Authority.
The simplified products will be available from April, and have been designed to encourage saving by people not normally able to afford advice.
Charges will be capped at 1.5% but the products will come with limited advice from financial advisers with no formal qualifications and who are more lightly regulated.
Do you think this new range of products is a good idea?
Is the government taking the right approach to encourage us to save more?
Are you concerned that the people selling these products will not have formal qualifications?
If you would like to comment on these or any other issues that the new range of products raises, please send us your views using the e-mail form below:
I cannot agree with your interviewee who claimed that National Savings would not gain greater trust than commercial companies if it entered into the pensions business.
My mother retired recently - at exactly the wrong time, during the start of the Iraq war in fact - and was disappointed with just about everything she had been sold over the years from her shortfallen endowment to the pathetic return on her pension top-ups.
She has been a lifelong National Savings customer and would, I am sure, have taken out a pension with them had one been available.
Based on her experience, I have no pension, preferring to invest in property.
In theory the low-cost products are a good idea. However, as the margins will be so thin for the providers, I cannot really see them promoting them over products which they already offer which generate greater profits.
The end result will be that the take-up will be low and they will eventually fall by the wayside.
The BBC may edit your comments and not all emails will be published. Your comments may be published on any BBC media worldwide.
The comments we publish are not necessarily the views of the BBC but will reflect the balance of views we have received. It is helpful if contributors state if they work for any organisation relevant to an issue discussed. Readers should form their own views on whether messages published represent undeclared interests, or views prompted by a common source.