The avalanche of words on last week’s Adair pensions report seemed to miss one significant point. Retirement is likely to be delayed to 67 or even later. Yet there is no realistic possibility that most people can sustain, at such an age, the jobs they held at 47 or 57. Even in an era when we are bursting with expensive health, few workers performing functions that require physical exertion or creative imagination can meet such demands late into their seventh decade. Commercial life will become moribund, if senior executives are given a right to stay at the helm into their late sixties, keeping big salaries and perks, even if exceptional individuals can justify them. Approaching 60, I know that I am already past a sensible age to edit a big newspaper, even if someone were rash enough to want me to. We need to start getting used to the idea that, in our last years before formal retirement, most of us will have to do humbler jobs than we have been used to, for more modest rewards.
issue 10 December 2005
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in