If I were to ask you to recall something about the Conservative party conference in Brighton in 1980, irrespective of your age or political interests, I’d say it'll take you a minute or two to come up with something compelling.  What may not surprise you of the speech that I recently recalled is that it concerns, the Iron Lady, Margaret Thatcher. 

In her keynote address to the party faithful that year, and in response to media speculation regarding policy U turns, she arguably delivered one of the most memorable lines of any leader in the modern era.  'You turn if you want to, the lady's not for turning'.  No matter what you think of the substance or style of her politics or the lack of social justice in her policies, there are few examples of her reneging on any given issue.  Whether you consider this an attribute or not, George Osborne's propensity to redress, amend or revoke clearly set out policies has provided the media with a powerful stick to hit the Chancellor with.  Fuel duty, relief on charitable donations, the pasty and caravan tax, tax on improvements to listed buildings and perhaps the most controversial of all child benefit, one wonders what the woman who spent 11 years in the top job would have made of it all.

As if the poor old beleaguered Chancellor didn't have enough to contend with, he now has the pensioners on his case.  Next month a policy, that was introduced by Winston Churchill in 1925 and provides those of a pensionable age with a higher tax allowance than the rest of the population, is to be rescinded.  For anyone that will have their 65th birthday after the 5th April this year, they will not be able to quality for the higher tax allowance which can have savings of up to £3,000.  Those that are lobbying on this issue have garnered considerable support.  As of last week an online petition of over 100,000 people have forced the coalition to have a new debate on the issue in the House of Commons and the National Pensioners Convention are pushing for another U turn on the so-called 'Granny tax'.  Surely not?

Those advocating a U turn point to the fact that this is being introduced when those earning £150,000 are getting a tax cut, hardly fair they say.  However this policy may have more to do with tomorrow than it does today.  New figures issued by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) have highlighted that out of a total of 367,000 people that have become their own boss in the past five years more than 300,000 are over the age of 50, the pensioners of tomorrow.   In this context it seems more than a little incongruous of the Chancellor to introduce this policy within an age bracket that appears to be stimulating the economy as much as, if not more, than other demographics.  Perhaps it is the very fact that we have an ageing workforce that the Chancellor is introducing this tax now, as many commentators believe that retiring at the age of 75 or 80 will in years to come, be the norm - easier the row today than the war tomorrow. Statistics fully support the ageing workforce analogy with the ONS also highlighting that the number of people working beyond state pension age has nearly doubled over the past 20 years to 1.4million.  Whilst there are some who would be skeptical about the level of contribution as regards entrepreneurship & economic generation in the older demographic, these figures cannot be ignored. 

The increase in the average working age is as much through necessity as it is design.  On a global basis, lowering birth rates and better health leading to longer lives coupled with diminishing financial circumstances make an ever increasing average working age inevitable.  A report by the Centre for Economic and Business Research (CEBR) reinforces the claims that many UK workers that are now in their twenties will be forced to work to 75 as much as anything as a result of circumstances in China which are set to constrict yields and reduce interest rates for the foreseeable future.  The fallout of all of this is that due to low interest rates, pensions will be underfunded keeping annuity rates low.  It's not as if the position with the state pension is likely to ease the burden with it set to rise to 67 years old in 2028.

There is of course the view that those over a certain age are dead wood and that they are stealing the jobs of the young, based on the analysis that there are a fixed number of jobs within the economy.  Contrary to this many economists are of the view that the economy expands, broadly, with the size of the workforce although this is a hard concept for a non economist to comprehend in the UK's current economic plight.  In October last year the government brought in some protection for those no longer wishing to retire at 65 having outlawed the default retirement age, which means that it is much more difficult for businesses to 'offload' older employees.  The reality of all this begs the question of the business community, at large, what changes or plans are they making to address this evolving demographic?  Recent reports would suggest not much.

There is no doubt that many of those remaining at work beyond retirement age have highly coveted talents supported by invaluable experience.  However the gradual shift over the next decade should act as a catalyst for businesses to review their training and budgets to cater for those that are well into their 60's.  A likely requirement would be for more flexible working, part time hours, addressing issues with hearing, vision and circulation which impact upon the effectiveness of touch screen devises.  There is technology already available that will solve many of the issues associated with an older workforce which have been developed with a view to supporting disability as opposed to age.  Loughborough University recently completed a study into the impact of an ageing workforce and found that technological solutions do not have to be hi - tech.  According to Professor Cheryl Haslam, physical activity and ensuring that the workforce gets some element of physical exercise is very important as sitting at desks for long periods cause’s problems.

Of course there are some progressive companies that are planning for the changes ahead.  At one of its plant's in Germany, BMW chose staff for a production line based on an unusual qualification, they had to be an average age of 47 (8 years older than its usual production line).  The initiative called 'Heute fur Morgen', translating to 'today for tomorrow', was an exercise in learning what the requirements were of the workforce it expects to employ in 10 years time.   As a result of the programme the 42 member team in collaboration with management instituted 70 changes to the way they worked.  Only last week GlaxoSmithKline, the global pharmaceutical company announced that it is reviewing how to create a healthcare policy for its older employees.  The company has launched a think tank to consider options that will help promote a culture that values age and experience, enables flexible working practices, offers jobs that account for mental and physical capacity relating to old age, considers the training needs of its older employees and designs a curriculum to meet those needs.

The challenge for the business community is that this type of planning for a future workforce is at best disparate.   Whilst it is always difficult to encourage businesses to invest or plan ahead in the midst of a recession this type of planning is vital to ensure we have a competitive and sustainable workforce in the years ahead.  

Claire Aiken is Managing Director of Public Relations & Public Affairs Company, Aiken PR.