‘Intergenerational fairness’ is simply the latest cover for envy
Towards the end of last month, a gang of youthful policy wonks started beating up the elderly. This is something we will have to get used to. The proposal from the Intergenerational Foundation to ease over-60s out of their three- or four-bedroomed houses to make way for younger families was just the first of a series of pernicious policies the think-tank is preparing as it opens up a new front in the politics of envy.
‘Intergenerational fairness’ is a seductive piece of branding. Who would declare themselves against fairness? In theory, it should have a particular appeal for conservatives. The idea that each generation is both beneficiary and trustee, with a moral obligation to the future, is as old as the conservative disposition. Edmund Burke pictured society as ‘a partnership not only between those who are living, but between those who are living, those who are dead, and those who are to be born’. Successive generations of Conservative politicians have taken up this theme, culminating in David Willetts’s 2010 book The Pinch, a provocative and engaging account of how the selfish and irresponsible baby-boomers ate all the pies.
In the Conservative mind, ‘intergenerational equity’ is comprehended as a duty of good stewardship and underpins a healthy reluctance to burden tomorrow’s taxpayers with the bills for today’s consumption. The coalition is eager to show its commitment to levelling the generational playing field. There was that Tory election poster: ‘Dad’s nose. Mum’s eyes. Gordon Brown’s debt.’ And last year Nick Clegg said, ‘There is nothing fair about denying you have a problem and leaving it for the next generation to clear it up. Would you ask your children to pay your credit card bill?’
Of course you wouldn’t.

Comments
Join the debate for just £1 a month
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for £3.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just £1 a monthAlready a subscriber? Log in