Scheme members are not equipped to deal with the tax implications of accessing their pension, last week's Pensions Buzz respondents said.
The 96 respondents also answered questions on the government's progress on proposals from its defined benefit (DB) white paper and whether property investment is still a good option for pension fund investors.
The vast majority (82%) of this week's 96 Pensions Buzz respondents said scheme members are not equipped to deal with the tax implications of accessing their pension. Of these, one said: "It's complicated as is the whole at-retirement process. Most members' expertise lies elsewhere and they are hesitant to access advice not least because of the cost."
Another pundit said: "Pensions and tax is a toxic mix when it comes to decision-making. You need a tax qualification to work out the best option, and most people don't have one."
"The average scheme member does not fully understand the tax implications but the information is available out there," added another.
Just 8% of respondents believed members are equipped for this, with one commenting: "Members are provided with a lot of information by providers and can take independent advice if they need specialist guidance."
"Provided the scheme bites the bullet and gives members access to good quality advice, rather than letting the wider market get its teeth into them," suggested another.
Two in five respondents said that moving into a consolidation vehicle was not an appropriate long-term objective for a DB scheme, with many suggesting there is not a single fix for all.
One commentator said: "Employers should not be planning to shirk their responsibilities and pass risk onto members. If consolidation should happen at all, it should be as a last resort, not as a long-term plan."
A further respondent added: "Not in most circumstances as virtually all employers will be able to afford buyout one day even if they don't want to".
"It might be appropriate for a specific scheme, but as a general principle - certainly not," said another.
Just over a third (37%) agreed a consolidation vehicle is appropriate, with one suggesting: "It could cut out a lot of inefficiency and cost from the system, and be a good route to both protect the Pension Protection Fund and safeguard members' benefits".
"It is a possible consideration for some schemes. Obviously depending on such issues as funding and sponsor covenant long term," another added.
More than half (57%) of this week's pundits said the government is not making enough progress on proposals from its DB white paper, with most suggesting they are too busy with other things at the moment.
One commentator explained: "All seems quite slow and too much focus on commercial consolidators rather than looking at some of the other solutions which are already out there."
"There is not the time or political appetite for this to be pushed through quickly," added another.
Just a tenth thought the government is making enough progress, with one suggesting: "Yes, but it is inevitably going to be very slow as they are trying to create a governance and capital oversight regime when TPR is light years away from being able to oversee commercial providers."
A different person added: "I would much rather they concentrated all of their efforts on other more pressing matters affecting the UK."
One third did not know with one suggesting: "The bottom line of the paper was that everything was fine and didn't need changing."
Nearly three-quarters (72%) of respondents believed property investment is still a good option for pension fund investors, with many suggesting it is a good option if part of a diversified portfolio.
One commentator suggested: "Only long term and if a small part of a total pension scheme." The same person questioned why investment should be restricted to commercial property.
A different person said: "Providing there are still sufficient liquid assets for cash flow purposes, there property is a good long-term asset."
Of the 10% that did not believe property investment is still a good option, one said: "For a few but as time horizons shorten with maturing DB schemes the scope to add this asset is reducing."
"Too illiquid for schemes that are mature and have negative cash flow," said another.
A fifth (18%) of pundits did not know, with one suggesting: "Uncertainty around the future of the high street means not necessarily such a good deal as it once may have been."
A further respondent stated it depends on the circumstances and type of property.
The majority (62%) of respondents said no such rate exists when it comes to viable long-term interest rates for a new and less generous DB pension scheme.
One pundit said: "There have been too many fingers burned across the previous DB schemes for any thought to be given to opening new DB schemes. Even if the perfect economic climate were to come along, there would be no guarantee how long that climate would last."
"Why would any employer accept this risk when doing so adds a burden that is vulnerable to future government intervention that has historically only been to increase cost/liability for a scheme set up voluntarily," said another.
A different person stated: "They remain perfectly viable, but sponsors are not willing to pay the required rate and accept the related volatility."
A third of commentators said 5%-9% is viable, with one stating: "Artificially low interest rates have ensured younger generations cannot benefit from DB type arrangements."
"Provided retirement ages move up with longevity," another said.
Just 6% thought a viable rate was 10% or above.
In this week's Pensions Buzz, we want to know whether you support the ruling that defined benefit (DB) trustees must equalise GMPs in past transfers.
This week’s top stories included the rejection of an automatic guidance amendment in the Pension Schemes Bill, while The Pensions Regulator posted a sharp increase in the use of its powers.
The majority of the pensions industry agrees an eventual net-zero target should not be mandated for schemes as part of the Pension Schemes Bill, according to a Professional Pensions poll.
Local Pension Partnership Administration (LPPA) has become the latest organisation to join the Pension Scams Industry Group (PSIG) forum.
Two-thirds of UK fund managers are reducing investments in companies that fail on diversity and inclusion scores, according to a survey by Edelman.