International Longevity Centre - UK

Across Europe there is growing awareness among citizens of the importance of engaging in physical activity to maintain health and wellbeing.  Decreasing levels of activity among populations in Europe are, however, a particular concern, with the 2002 Eurobarometer study suggesting that two thirds of the adult population in EU countries is insufficiently active to achieve optimal health benefits[1].  While many express the intention and desire to be more physically active, this is often not translated into action. 
                                                
Recently the ILC-UK studied the challenge for policy makers to understand why, despite the general awareness about the importance of physical activity since inactivity is a risk factor for many diseases and conditions , individuals are failing to do so.  In particular, there is a need to understand the significant inequalities in the levels of physical activity in relation to socioeconomic class, age, gender, ethnicity and disability.

Evidence emerging from research^[2] supports the need for a comprehensive approach to promoting healthy behaviour and reducing health inequalities, offering tailored activities for different groups. Statistics masks significant inequalities that exist between various groups. In particular, those in lower socio-economic groups, ethnic minority groups, older people, individuals with disabilities and women in general are less likely to be active than the general population.

Our key questions were: 

• What policy interventions have been effective in improving the transition from an informative to a developing and implementative phase?
• How can policy interventions tackle inequalities?

Arising from case studies and round table discussions, it was clear that the most effective approach should combine action in a number of areas:

• Designing the physical environment in a way that is conducive to increased activity
• Encouraging community-based initiatives that involve citizens in developing a range of activities that reflect their preferences and are accessible in their neighbourhood
• Supporting primary health care services to identify people at risk and refer them to community based initiative

So what next?

Recently in the UK there was the BUPA Great North Run, Cycle Skyride for all ages and the Memory Walk of the Alzheimer’s Association in London.

Also “Walking the Way to Health” initiatives, “More Active For Life” campaign represent fun activities that involve more people of all ages.

The 2012 Olympics in London surely give us an opportunity to focus on physical activity not just amongst the highest of athletes and encouragement of young people to take up sport but also a chance to think of the activity there could be right across generations.

Experienced sportspeople can be involved as mentors and coaches and replicate this activity at a local level, using local community facilities such as schools, community halls and leisure centres.

At the moment more than a thousand local authority pools in England have been offering free swimming to more than 20 million people aged 16 and under, or 60 and over, since April – with more than 250 councils backing the scheme, including 31 in London. It is disappointing however that despite the fact that more local authorities offer free swimming to older people than younger, there are significantly more younger people actually taking up the free swimming offer. The latest statistics revealed that  1.6 million free swims were taken by the over 60s compared with 2.8m free swims for children. In evaluating the success or otherwise of free swimming the Government should undertake research to understand why older people seem to be less likely than younger to benefit. Perhaps it isn’t the cost that is the main barrier, or perhaps local authorities are simply not as good at promoting the offer to older people.

In the light of these opportunities it would be great if GPs brought all the possibilities to the notice of the patients.

While the Olympic Games will entertain the masses let’s hope the benefits of the UK taking a lead for the 2012 Olympics gives the benefit of physical activity that can be replicated everywhere.

Noreeen Siba

References:
1) European Opinion Research Group. Special Eurobarometer: Physical activity. Brussels, European Commission Directorates-General for Health and Consumer Protection and for Press and Communication, 2003
http://www.euro.who.int/mediacentre/PR/2006/20060908_1
2) Physical Activity and Health in Europe: Evidence or Action, WHO Europe, 2006

The General Assembly of the United Nations stated, in 1990, that the 1st October would be the International Day of Older Persons.  The activities, organised world-wide during this day, are a reminder that the rights of older people are inseparable from the principles expressed by the United Nations. Last year Ban Kid-moon, the current Secretary -General of the United Nations, said that “The United Nations is committed to promote the independence, participation and dignity of older people and to combat all forms of neglect, abuse and violence”.

The International Longevity Centre Global Alliance comprises different centres world-wide (United States, France, UK, Netherlands, South Africa,  Japan, Czech Republic, Israel, India, Dominican Republic and Argentina).  All of the organisations in the Alliance monitor and research their respective national  policies on older people and how each country responds to Older People’s day, perhaps this also give us an idea of their policy approach to older people more generally.

Most of the ILC member countries celebrate Older People’s Day on October 1. However, the Japanese have traditionally celebrated September 15 as Senior Citizens Day and the third Monday of September as Respect for the Aged Day and has therefore not celebrated the UN day.

The involvement of national Governments is mixed: the celebrations are led  predominately by third sector organisations, but a certain degree of initiation and coordination by Governments is evident in South Africa, India and Dominican Republic. In comparison in South Africa, France, India and Dominican Republic, the Governments participate in the celebrations, but do not take a leading role.

The range of activities across the world is varied and includes national fairs, meetings with local authorities , trips, visits to service centers and senior associations and institutions and older people led activities. South Africa’s activities are particularly interesting, there is an annual  competition called “Pretty things for little things” which encourages grandparents to make items for their grandchildren and they are submitted for judging and prizes are awarded. There is even a so called “Gero Olympics” event, held countrywide, in which teams of older people, who have practised all year, compete in various athletic categories for prizes.  In India there is an annual award function known as the “Great Elders Awards”, the awards are given to  older people with commendable achievements in any field.

While many of the countries involved thus approach Older People’s Day in different ways, it is evident all the countries seem to agree on the fact that celebrating  Older People’s Day as an international day is important in order to to raise the profile of ageing issues and rights and to have different generations meeting together and celebrating the achievements of older people in our communities.

Without a doubt, across the world, a lot of energy goes into supporting the UN celebrations on the 1^st October, however, it would help to have a more formal evaluation of the impact of the celebrations. In setting up the day, the UN’s aim of promoting the rights of older people is laudable and, if the Westminster government are to develop the day into one which genuinely promotes the rights of older people, they certainly will benefit from looking at what our colleagues across the world are doing.

The German election has highlighted the increasingly dominant role played by an older (and ageing) electorate across the world.  Those over 60 in Germany make up over three in ten of the electorate (20 million of the 62 million) whilst the over 50s comprise almost half of those entitled to vote.
  
In those countries with an ageing society, not only are more older people eligible to vote, but they are also more likely to vote. In the 2005 German election for example 85% of older people voted compared with just 66% of the 21 to 25 year age group. And ahead of the Japanese election in August just over half of Japanese  people in their 20s said they intended to vote, compared to 84 percent of respondents in their 60s planned to vote.

But the key question is whether this voting power translates to a greater political and policy interest in ageing issues. Certainly in Germany there are indications that it does. Ahead of the election the German Government raised pensions 2.4 percent despite inflation being close to zero. They also introduced legislation guaranteeing that pensions would not be cut even if wage levels go down. 

In the American Presidential election, Barrack Obama won two out of every three votes from people aged 18 to 29. But there are already fears among some Democratic supporters that the mid-term elections will feature an older electorate than the presidential elections (younger people can be less inclined to vote in congressional elections) making it difficult for Mr Obama’s administration.

However, whilst older people are more likely to vote than other age groups, if they are considered to be less likely to switch their party allegiance than other age groups, it is possible the mainstream political parties could take their vote for granted. In the Japanese election the older electorate were, of course, a target for politicians. But at the same time, the parties courted the “yawarakai hoshu-so” (flexible conservatives), younger well educated middle classes who are known to be floating voters, and whose views have been shown to be decisive at election time.

Without a doubt, what all of this highlights is the need for Governments across the world to do more to get more young people voting. Unless they succeed, there is a major risk of intergenerational conflict.

Ahead of an election in the UK it is not yet clear if the ageing population is having a major influence on any of the parties or their big media machines. The Government’s Big Care Debate has attracted some attention but it can’t be claimed that the issue has risen to the top of the political agenda. And the only media coverage for the new Ageing Strategy was on the issue of the bringing forward of the review of the Default Retirement Age.

In the context of the UK election, it will be fascinating to see how UK politicians view older voters. Will it be a group they need to attract, and if so, will we see announcements akin to the German one in the forthcoming pre-budget report? What is certainly a truism is that the political parties ignore the ageing society at their peril. David Sinclair

David Sinclair

The publication of the annual set of Internet Access statistics from National Statistics has emerged again to almost no media or public interest. Yet in terms of age and digital exclusion, the findings are both fascinating and slightly depressing.

On the positive side, the survey reveals that over 18 million UK households (7 in 10) now have Internet access and 37 million adults (76 per cent of adults) accessed the Internet in the three months prior to interview.

Yet the report also paints a picture of an older population which continues to be excluded from the potential benefits of digital engagement. 64% of over 65s have never used the internet (and only a very small decrease in the percentage of non-users from last year) and whilst 73% of adults who used the internet, were online every day, of the over 65s, only 52% were going online every day or almost every day.

And in terms of the digital economy, older people remain much less likely than other ages to buy online, with only 21% having bought a product online compared with over 80% of those under 44.

But digital exclusion is an issue which is much more important than getting cheaper car insurance. Those who are not online are increasingly excluded from a wide range of public, private and voluntary sector services and digital inclusion is increasingly likely to compound other forms of social exclusion.

There is an “Invest to Save” argument for intervention. Unless government addresses digital exclusion, it will find that it is forced to continue to provide a wide range of services in non-digital formats. The potential cost savings for government by delivering services through technology could be completely wiped out by the costs of delivering offline services to the digitally excluded.

As part of its Digital Britain proposals, the Government has asked Martha Lane Fox to Champion solutions to digital exclusion.  Over the last five years there have been countless reports and recommendations setting out how to tackle the digital divide. Learning, access and motivation are undoubtedly part of the solution, but there are fundamental market issues where the Government and Ofcom may have to engage (and have historically been reluctant). The continuing direct and indirect age discrimination promoted by many website providers (in marketing and the occasional use of upper age limits) alongside poor practice in terms of web usability and accessibility must be addressed.

With such small increases in internet use by older people year on year, we cannot wait for the market to solve the problem and assume it will go away. For progress to be made it will be vital for Martha Lane Fox and colleagues not to be afraid of saying the unpopular to industry and government.

David Sinclair

The Department for Transport has published the findings of the National Travel Survey (2008). Coming after a recent media furore about free travel for older people, it is interesting to see how the travelling habits of older people are changing. With isolation among older people a continuing problem, the importance of mobility to older people cannot be underestimated.   

An interesting trend from a demographic perspective is the increase in numbers of older people with a driving license. In addition to people living active lifestyles for longer and driving later in life, the growth in recent years of women drivers accounts for some of the growth in the numbers of older drivers. Whilst the proportion of men (all adults) with driving license is relatively stable, there has been an increase among women, from 57% (1995/97) to 65% in 2008. 

But whilst we have seen the growth in the number of older drivers, it seems that Government continues to procrastinate on their long promised DVLA Medical Licensing Review. This review, which began almost 5 years ago, is due to consider issues around  the safety issues of drivers with medical conditions.  Consultants were employed and produced a yet to be published (and now slightly dated) report.  Alongside a changing demographic profile and different travel habits, we have seen significant advances in medical science and vehicle technology since the last set of medical licensing rules were set.

There is no strong evidence that older drivers are less safe than other groups (and in-fact evidence suggests they are much safer drivers than younger drivers) and it’s hard to understand why the review is taking so long to come to light. 

But transport is of course a much bigger issue than car usage and we shouldn’t forget of course that we still have a quarter of the population without access to a car. Across all adults 51% of households in the lowest income quintile had no car, compared with 11% in the highest income quintile.  The survey paints a positive picture in terms of the new and more generous concessionary fares schemes. With the changes, the take up rate of concessionary fare passes among people aged 60 and over has increased from 52% in 2002 to 63% in 2006 and 73% in 2008. In other words, not only is the scheme more generous than previously, millions more people are benefitting.   Transport and mobility amongst the biggest issues of concerns for older people and free travel has been very popular. When the Social Exclusion Unit asked older people what was key, the answer “transport, transport, transport” came back. The changes in transport habits among older people will raise some fascinating questions for transport policy for older people in the run up to a general election.

David Sinclair

This article was first published in the Yorkshire Post on 28th August 2009.

This year marks the 100^th anniversary of the first state pension payment. To qualify for the state pension in 1909 you needed to reach 70 to receive up to five shillings a week. Life expectancy was much lower back then and few of the early recipients lived for a long time after receiving their first pension payment.

The numbers have changed significantly since then. Only half a million people received a pension in 1909 but with us all living longer and the pension age falling, there are now over 12 million pensioners. This year alone, more than 700,000 people will reach State Pension Age and receive a basic pension of £95 (for single people), which is topped up for those with no or limited other sources of income (by pension credit) to £130.

Yet despite the increasing frequency of news stories highlighting that one in five pensioners live in poverty, we aren’t saving enough for our retirement. A survey published earlier this year revealed that half of adults between the age of 20 and 60 are not saving for their pensions. The under 30s were least likely to be saving with only about 36% of these putting towards a pension scheme.

And even those who are saving, a significant proportion aren’t saving enough to ensure a comfortable retirement. One survey exposed the fact that over half of those who do save aren’t actually putting enough away to ensure a comfortable retirement.
Yet with millions of individuals still not saving, many millions of younger people are likely to head towards retirement oblivious to the fact that they are a likely to be living longer on a much lower income than they anticipated.

So why is it that despite the real risk of poverty in later life, many younger people are not saving for their future?

Saving for a pension has never really been the first choice for young adults and it is clear that there is a strong “live for today, save tomorrow” mentality among this group. Recent research for the Department for Work and Pensions noted that many younger people have few financial responsibilities and their lives revolve around social activities and going out. In effect, they argue, many younger people prioritise spending over saving.

But the issue is not simply  younger people wanting to have a good time rather than save for the future. At a time where increasing levels of student debt is a major and growing problem and where the next priority is to get a foot on the housing ladder, it is understandable that they don’t prioritise pension savings. And of course, some see that owning a house is a key part of retirement planning.

Another barrier for many is the perception that the amount they could afford to save in a pension would be too small to be worthwhile. Yet the earlier people save (even relatively small amounts), there is significant long term benefit. One of the questions younger people often ask is “how much do I need to save?” There is no right answer but some advisers say that as a rough estimate you should take the age you start paying  your pension and halve it, and put this percentage of your salary aside each year until you retire. Using this formula, someone starting to save for a pension at 32 would need to save 16% of their salary for the rest of their life. But if you start at 20 you would need to put just 10% of your salary into a pension.

Research highlights that many younger people do believe that saving is a good thing but have negative stereotypes that those who have saved are the ‘misers’, living austere lives. Another part of the problem is the negative image many younger people have of old age; there is frequently a perception that old age is a boring and bleak time and not worth thinking about.

And of course, a detailed (or even basic) understanding of different types of pensions and how they operate is not something which many people have. If you don’t understand pensions then why would you put your money into one?

There is also of course a disincentive for some younger people to save in that pension saving may simply pull them above the levels which allow them to qualify for means tested benefits. But at the same time, many people assume that the pension will give them a higher income than the reality.

And finally, across the whole of the population the distrust in the financial services industry is a major challenge for pension saving. And it’s not a challenge helped by the various crises over the last couple of years. A Trust Index produced by Nottingham University Business School on behalf of the Financial Services Research Forum revealed that those aged between 25-35 show significantly lower degrees of trust in financial services. 

So what can be done?

There are of course a number of initiatives which could help encourage younger people to save into a pension. The Government (and private sector) interest and investment in financial education and generic financial advice will certainly help. A big factor influencing whether younger people save is the attitude of the employer to pensions. Research has highlighted that an employer offering a pension scheme that they made a contribution to was perceived to be the greatest influence in encouraging someone to start to save. So there is a major role for employers.
Younger people are also heavily influenced by positive examples set by friends and family and getting in the saving habit early is very important. There is at least one provider (Virgin) which offers pensions for children.The Government will introduce personal accounts with automatic enrolment. Taking the hard work out of how to start to save will undoubtedly increase the number of people saving for their future. At the moment the individual has to make a conscious choice to sign up – in the future people will have to make the choice not to.
In producing his influencial report(s) on pensions in 2004/05, Lord Turner set out some likely scenarios for the future. He noted that we will have to retire later (the state pension age is now set to increase to 68 and may well go higher); we will have to save more; we will have to pay more tax, or we will have more poorer pensioners. The reality is that some combination of these will happen.