Recalibrating retirement will take time

It includes a lot of good news about how early interventions are improving healthcare outcomes and ultimately longevity, justifying the health improvement tactics of the director of Public Health – who just happens to be the same person as the MoH.

Dr Nicola Brink says in the report that it is important for Guernsey to look at the positive economic impact of healthy ageing. Sounds good. But hold on… does that mean people living independent, relatively wealthy lives (in some cases) and spending leisure hours and pounds in the local economy for many more happily retired years than they used to?

Or does that mean a ‘positive economic impact’ from older people continuing to work, and keeping ageing islanders able to do that? Suddenly doesn’t sound so great.

Having islanders working for longer is definitely enshrined now in government policy, and is often referenced in States debates. But the people are sceptical – either on the grounds that they feel they can’t do the manual labour past 65, or won’t want to do any kind of labour come retirement age. And don’t forget not insignificant numbers who, around Covid, thought enough’s enough, and stepped back from the work side of their work-life balance.

That’s far from everyone. But it’s more than a few. And when politicians talk about people remaining economically active for longer, they need to realise that’s probably going to take longer than they think to be a significant factor in pension and spending calculations.

Those who saw their parents and grandparents retire at 65 have set their own expectations, which maybe don’t feature a working life past 70, or even 65.

Even as the OAP age rises incrementally, it will take many more years before a new ‘retirement age’ is recalibrated in the minds of a majority.