John Gerard Hanafin (Fianna Fail)

I commend my colleague, Senator White, on the publication of a new approach to ageing and ageism. It is a very professional and useful policy document which will continue to assist for many years ahead. There are many people who have reached a senior age and who continue to contribute hugely to society, for example, Nelson Mandela and, in our own country, Garrett FitzGerald, who is chancellor of the NUI, and Ken Whitaker who is still showing the way and leading an active life in his 90s. At a very senior age, the late Pope John Paul II had a schedule which would put the rest of us to shame. Those of us who attempt to work to the best of our ability could not hold a candle to his work schedule. In the past, we looked up to Ronald Reagan, David Ben-Gurion and Golda Meir. History and the Bible are full of references to people who have reached a senior age and have led the way.

I am sure we can all refer not only to work or leadership experiences but to family experiences. I was fortunate to be partly reared by a grandparent and an aunt. That contribution to rearing and educating children is often underestimated. It was a huge benefit to me to hear about the Troubles, the economic war, the depression, how Ireland survived during the Emergency and to grow up in the 1960s and 1970s. Every generation must redefine and admit the benefit of that. De Valera did so in his time when he spoke of the wisdom by the fireside.

We need the ageing population to actively work in the workplace. The demographics show we need people to go back to work. It is unfortunate to have to say we need people to go back to work because nobody should, by necessity, have to go back to work. However, it is good to be needed. The baby boom generation, which turned 60 this year, contains the largest number of people to voluntarily give up work in such a short time. It is far larger than the generation which will follow it or any which preceded it. It casts a shadow over the companies it is set to leave behind. Japan, for instance, expects its workforce to shrink by 16% over the next 25 years. Europe will see the number of workers nearing retirement grow by one quarter. Some companies are already complaining of a shortage of skills even before they have started to dole out carriage clocks and fountain pens.

As previous speakers stated, when people are at their most productive and have reached a stage where they have got an expertise and understanding of their workplace it does not make sense for them to be expected to retire. I support every effort to exclude ageism. Perhaps senior company employees who have reached the top of their scale could have an option to be retained on a consultancy basis or have their pay structure re-examined.

We must recognise the problems that exist and deal with them. I am certain that many older employees would jump at the chance to continue to work, as they have grown used to the lifestyle and, in many cases, have achieved a work-life balance. I consider it healthy for people to continue in paid employment for as long as they wish. Companies must adapt and legislation must be amended accordingly to ensure that we reform the policies and practices that constitute barriers to meaningful participation by older people.

We must eliminate disabling, negative images and stereotypes associated with retirement and older age and create an enabling environment to facilitate all older people to be involved in active ageing. We must have equality with due regard to difference. That does not require that everybody be treated exactly the same. It requires that there would be due regard to difference. It would not be appropriate to treat all older people in exactly the same way as younger people. A strategy for equality must respect differences and ensure that difference is not used unjustly to favour or to disadvantage people. The central question in this context is if there is a relevant difference. If that is the case then adjustments must be made to take account of and respect the difference.

We also need equality with due regard to diversity. We must recognise the diverse needs and aspirations of older people, including the needs and aspirations of groups within the older population who suffer or have suffered multiple discrimination. This has been the experience of groups such as older women, older travellers and older members of other minority groups. We need full, legal equality. That is an essential condition for, but not sufficient to ensure, equality of treatment. Older people must have full equality before the law. That will require some changes. Full equality must be underpinned by adequate implementation measures so that the framework of rights is complete and sustainable. There must be full equality of opportunity, participation and outcome as appropriate for older people to be involved in all aspects of society.

Age should not in itself be a barrier to involvement. Equality must apply in all areas such as work, education, training, health, voluntary activities, social, cultural, sporting and artistic activities. In order to enable older people to fully participate in society, their rights and capacity to do so must be facilitated by appropriate provisions for consultation and involvement in decision making for older people and their organisations and by the provision of necessary support to enable those organisations.

We need an integration of policy and services. A successful strategy requires that policies and services for older people be operated in an integrated manner. This means that there must be coherence between, for example, income maintenance and community care policies and between employment policies and education-training policies. The overall policies must be enabling and facilitating and be responsive to age, gender, cultural and other diversity.

We require intergenerational solidarity. Policies and practices must ensure fairness between the generations and encourage and facilitate activities which span the generations. We need mainstreaming and age proofing. All policy and public investment decisions must be analysed to ensure they do not adversely impact on the current generation of older people or provide incentives to any age group to make decisions that may adversely affect them in older age. It is also necessary to ensure these decisions contribute to greater equality for older people. Accordingly, this means there must be a systematic analysis of all policies and investment decisions to ensure they promote equality for older people and that the planning and implementation processes must be imbued with the equality agenda at every stage.

Mainstreaming a focus on age equality will require the assessment of impact of policy and resource allocation decisions on older people alongside clear, equality objectives for older people, the participation of older people's organisations in the impact assessment process and the monitoring of outcomes for older people. There must be a coherent mobilisation of all legal, financial, and organisational capacities in order to ensure a balanced relationship between older people and the rest of society.

This mainstreaming and proofing will be part of a wider mainstreaming of equality and equality proofing. There should be an involvement of all sectors of society. All sectors, including the State, employers and non-governmental organisations have a role in ensuring full participation of and equality for older people. The respective roles of these actors must be devised and implemented in partnership with older people and their organisations.

When Benjamin Franklin remarked that, "All would live long, but none would be old," he could hardly have known how apt a description of today's pensioners this would turn out to be. They are fitter, healthier and more in tune with the times than any previous generation. They are determined not to allow their age to hold them back. For the lucky few, including many baby-boomers, the first of whom are turning 60 this year, this means spending their golden years trekking in the Himalayas, dune-bashing in Dubai and generally showing us the lazy, unadventurous bunch we really are. For those who wish to go back to work, that is the minimum opportunity we, as a Government, should allow them.