Remember the Waspi women, who used to leap up and down outside Tory conferences for the right to continue to retire at 60? They claimed that their carefully laid retirement plans had been thrown into disarray by the government’s decision to equalise women’s retirement age with that of men – even though they had been given two decades’ notice and their careful plans for retirement hadn’t, it seemed, quite extended to bothering to find out at what age they would retire.

The ideal should be to water down the concept of retirement altogether

The government eventually saw them off, but it is once again risking the wrath of 50 and 60 somethings – of both sexes – by threatening to bring forward the date at which the retirement age will be raised to 68. To declare a personal interest, under current plans I am due to qualify for a state pension at the age of 67 but under the proposed changes it could mean me having to work – quelle horreur! – a full extra year.

Except that I wasn’t planning to retire anyway, at any age – or at least not until I am rendered incapable by age. My inspiration comes from the Rolling Stones, still leaping about on stage in their late 70s, rather than all these librarians and pen-pushers swanning off in the 50s, claiming to be too fagged out to continue any longer.

That is why I say to the government, don’t fiddle around bringing forward the time at which the retirement age will rise to 68. Go the full hog and jack it up to 70 immediately. The retirement age is hopelessly out of date. Seventy was the age at which workers could claim the old age pension when it was introduced in 1908 – at which time life expectancy at birth was 51 for men and 55 for women. The average Briton, then, could not expect to live to see retirement. Now, you can take the state pension at 66, and life expectancy has increased to 79 for men and 83 for women – in other words we can now expect to enjoy around a decade and a half in retirement.

It is simply not sustainable to have a workforce which is gradually diminishing as a proportion of the population. We cannot have half the adult population swanning around on Saga coaches, supported by the efforts of the other half. The result will be public services, especially the NHS, which are even less functional than now.

The ideal should be to water down the concept of retirement altogether, to turn our latter years into a time when we work less, but don’t give up work altogether, at least not while we are still physically and mentally able to do so. The alternative is that we continue to retire in our late 60s, but have to live in penury as a result. Sure, go on your cruise of a lifetime, just don’t make an occupation out of it – once you have disembarked at Southampton, get back to your workplace and get some money into your bank account for the next cruise.

Of course, unions will be outraged by any attempt to increase the time that workers are expected to remain in work. To which I say: why is it that you hate your jobs so much? You will be much wealthier, and healthier, if you carry on contributing what you can beyond the age at which you qualify for the state pension.