John Crown (Independent) | Oireachtas source

The TILDA process is phenomenally great research. It is a credit to all involved that, unlike much research, it will provide useful data. Are the issues related to the increased prevalence of dementia in this population real or are they related to changes in diagnostic criteria or people taking the problem more seriously? Were assumptions made about folks who had intellectual disabilities in the past and was insufficient effort put into assessing whether a dementia complication arose as well?

I am reminded of a bigger issue, which the research will address. People engaged in public policy formation will have to think about this, even though they are not good at it. I refer to long-term planning and thinking past the next election specifically. We will have a significantly changed demographic over the next 20 to 30 years. As a result of improvements in health policy, people will live much longer. A higher incidence and prevalence of certain diseases will emerge because people will live long enough to get them. The good news part of that equation is that people who live longer will live better. We have arbitrarily decided that many people can or, in many cases, must become former workers and dependants on the State or pension policies of one kind or another. These people may in extreme cases wish to continue working and, in other cases, could continue working, although they would gratefully accept the offer of retirement based on the criteria originally formulated in 1880s Germany, which was that people should retire at the age of 65. At that time the average age of death was 41 and the average life expectancy of a 65 year old was another two years whereas now it is approximately 18 years.

The reality that is going to have to dawn on people who examine public policy writ large is that we will have inevitably an increasing population of citizens who are wholly or partially dependent on the effort and care of others, which is good news. They will need the help of others because of their own infirmity, illnesses or various challenges and disabilities but the number of people on whom they depend is getting smaller proportionately. We will need to critically examine social policy in the area of the able elderly and whether it is sustainable to force people into retirement who wish to continue working and not be additional dependants. The harder question that will arise is a necessary corollary of that, which is whether optional retirement should be provided for people who have reached an arbitrarily defined age set 130 years ago when we need the resource of people continuing working to deal with those who have no discretion about the level of dependence they have. Professor McCarron should keep up the good work and I hope it inspires a few more thoughtful debates. I also hope the message gets through to full-time politicians that they need to start to think about big picture issues in public policy planning.