Dear Prime Minister
30th
May 2006
RE: Civil Service and Central and Local Government Pensions
There is
apparent wide spread support for the raising of the retirement age of
public sector workers to those of the rest of the community.
When I was a young man we were told by the newspapers that we shouldn’t
have more than a couple of children because of the World’s population
becoming too great for the resources that we share. We were also told that
we were living in the soon to arrive age of leisure and that we must take
an interest in other activities, not just work, as our working lives are
going to be shorter. This contrasts with pre and post war conditions,
where people were lucky to keep in work and worked long hours. Working in
the public sector has an attraction as there was (still is?) job security,
and a pension even though the pay was not so attractive.
One would expect our lives and work prospects to be better after the war,
as most of the damage caused by the second world war has been rectified
and millions of pounds have been invested in improvements and developments
of products and services and the pressure to reduce the length of the
working day has led to more leisure –even though it might not seem so!
If the country is to continue to attract talented and keen personnel into
the Civil Service and local and central government then I believe it would
be a mistake to reduce the benefits that should rightly be earnt through a
lifetime of dedication to the citizens of our country and expect those
workers to work longer before drawing their pension.
If the people do not understand that it is desirable to reward the
dedication, and value the knowledge, that certain groups of personnel
have, then it would appear to be a fault in their education. If you
disagree, and force teachers etc to work (possibly to they drop) to make
working conditions poorer, then you’ll lose some of your best personnel
and demoralise large sectors of the government workforce. Also, your
Government will lower the esteem that many citizens have for people who
work in the public sector; which will in turn lead to even more
demoralisation.
The most outstanding difference, in the 21st century, between 99% of the
population and the other 1% is that the other 1% could survive if not
thrive without the 99% but that the 99% would not survive without the
other 1%. That 1% has superior knowledge and skills, determination and
experience of unestimateable value
http://www.40thbombgroup.org/matthews/Ira62.htm
This is of course a postulate that could be the subject of a post doctoral
degree research project. The reality maybe that the figure is 0.5per cent!
of the population, which could include all manner of people (plumbers,
PM’s, Lords, craftsmen, sportsman/women, etc.) not necessarily those with
a high technological knowledge or intellect. but our gut feeling is that
we individually, really do not know very much.
I am quite sure that you do, as Prime Minister, know; not only what only a
prime minister knows but also possess knowledge, skill and experience that
you bring to that office. But the knowledge we have is never enough, we
need those people, the one percent, and need to keep producing them, and
need therefore, to look after them; as they in effect look after us.
Yours sincerely A. Citizen
