Two weeks ago, pensions came under discussion at the Labour party conference, when Baroness Castle threatened to shake the carefully constructed new Labour policy on pensions.

The week before, pensions were again in the news as the proposed second trial of Kevin Maxwell in relation to the Maxwell Group pension schemes was stayed.

This increased coverage of pensions is a far cry from the quiet of the late 1980s.

Recent events that have caused disquiet include the personal pensions mis-selling debacle; five years of uncertainty caused by the European Court of Justice's decisions on sex equality; and the Maxwell affair.The Maxwell furore and its aftermath were the impetus for the work of the pensions law review committee, chaired by Professor Roy Goode QC and set up by the government.

This was the most accomplished review of occupational pensions ever made.

Its 218 recommendations advocated a new legal regime designed to satisfy four criteria: fairness to all parties, security to scheme members and practicality and simplification of the law on occupational pension schemes.

This was followed by the Pensions Act 1995, which contains over 200 references to regulations that set out the detail of the regime.

The effect has been to change attitudes to pensions.

There is more awareness of pension rights and a greater wish to enforce those rights.

This is absolutely appropriate because for many people their pension is their second most valuable asset.Trust law has always provided remedies for the aggrieved parties in pension scheme cases but enforcement was often a struggle.

The activities of the pensions ombudsman are far more effective in providing accountability.

And increased publicity for pensions, combined with the minimal costs involved when the ombudsman investigates a complaint, have encouraged individuals to have recourse to him.

The pensions ombudsman's latest annual report found that the number of cases investigated had increased by 198% between 1995 and 1996.In addition, an avalanche of regulations is bursting out of the Department of Social Security.

A tightly knit supervisory regime backed up by fines and penalties for non-compliance is being created.

The new Occupational Pensions Regulatory Authority (OPRA) will be overseeing this regime.Greater security is also ensured by the requirement for member-nominated trustees (MNTs).

From April 1997, schemes must have arrangements that provide at least one-third MNTs unless alternative arrangements are accepted.

Since the beginning of this month, companies have been able to start the process of obtaining member approval for their alternatives.Many of the large schemes already have member trustees.

But there are thousands of schemes where the new requirement will be a significant departure.

Some scaremongers have said nobody will want to be a trustee because the Pensions Act 1995 has introduced new fines and penalties.

But member trustees who take their responsibilities seriously should have nothing to worry about.

Schemes and employers must also address the new minimum funding requirement, changes to contracting-out of the state scheme and greater disclosure requirements.

However, there is one area where the objectives of the Goode committee have not been achieved because the regime is far from simple.

There will be a settling-in period as trustees, administrators and their advisers explore their responsibilities under the regime.

The road ahead could be bumpy for some if they fail to change their attitudes.