This bulging generation is now approaching the end of their working lives. This means that new burdens on pension systems, both public and private, are being imposed.

Governments are looking at ways to trim the burden. But the truth is that Governments across the EU have been reluctant to fully grasp the nettle of reform due to the political risks they would have to run in the process.

With some reluctance, they have published plans aimed at reducing the generosity of existing arrangements. They have had little choice but to act to raise retirement ages from ridiculously low levels in the case of certain public sector employments.

In some cases, as in Ireland after the General election of 2020, reforms have been watered down, even thrown into reverse following a strong reaction from the voters.

But hard decisions cannot be deferred indefinitely if only for the sake of generations to come.

Europe’s ‘pay as you go’ systems are creaking. They require much more than tinkering around the edges if the whole system is not to go bust as the ratio of people aged 65 and over to those of working age (16 to 64) rises inexorably.

If people's life expectancy continues to rise at rates experienced on a regular basis since 1950, and the current baby bust endures, people will have to work longer.

To ensure that such people remain productive, many will have to be retrained and reskilled in mid-life.

Organisations will have to adapt to the needs of people who will be keen to work on a part-time basis rather like the current cohort of mainly female carers.

Ageist attitudes prevalent in many organisations will also have to be cast to the winds so that people are not pushed prematurely into retirement and on to the public pension payroll against their will.

Increasingly, judges have been sanctioning extensions in the working lives of people in both the public and private sector. The situation is adapting — and not before time.

It is worth examining the scale of the problem, both at national and at European level.

Let’s look at the situation in Europe, first.

According to Eurostat, in 2018, just over one-quarter of the population across the EU-27 were in receipt of at least one pension and expenditure on pensions was the equivalent to almost 13% of EU gross domestic product.

The average pension payout per person across the EU was €14,327, with wealthy little Luxembourg leading the way on a princely €28,000  per capita.

Between 2008 and 2018, pension expenditure rose by more than 18%.

In 2000, the European Commission warned that if prevailing pension benefits were to be maintained at current levels up to 2050, the contribution to the publicly funded pension system would have to rise from 16% of gross pay to a hefty 27% Many Europeans retire very early. This is the case, in particular, across much of financially strapped Southern Europe.

The EU Commission has estimated that if the retirement age were to be raised to 65 across the board, this would add 13% to EU output by 2050.

A raft of reforms are being considered and in some cases, implemented.

These include a lowering in the reference salary on which pension benefits are based. Increasing the eligibility requirements and finally, ensuring that pensions increase in line with prices as opposed to earnings (which have tended to rise at a higher rate than consumer prices). The Thatcher Government introduced the latter reform — to the great displeasure of British pensioners.

Europe has followed in large part the recommendation of the World Bank that a multi pillared structure of retirement income be put in place.

This has involved a lower basic pension with tackling pensioner poverty as the key goal.

Greater occupational pension   health coverage and increased incentives to individuals to set up private pension arrangements.

The reality, however, is that very many will continue to rely on the State pension as their key source of income in retirement.

Ireland is broadly aligned to the World Bank multi-pillar model, but just 35% of workers in the private sector have made any alternative provision. This explains the eagerness of the politicians to nudge workers in this direction through auto-enrolment — the plan which is currently on hold due to the pandemic.

The figures speak for themselves.

The accrued liability of Ireland’s publicly funded pension obligations amount to almost two and a half times modified national income ( the normal GDP measure is inflated in the case of Ireland and not accepted as reliable.) Remember that these future obligations are in addition to the country’s very high national debt.

The picture, here is somewhat better than in France or Italy where the pension liability is four times national income. The gap is due to the fact that Ireland's population is younger. However, our population is getting old fast.

The authors of a recent Department of Public Expenditure & Reform Working Paper estimate that spending on State pensions alone here rose by two billion a year between 2021 and 2020. The number of pensions are projected to double by 2050.

Steps have been taken to overhaul the system.

A single public service pension scheme was introduced following the Bailout as part of an agreement between public service management and the unions. In 2017, an additional Superannuation contribution for those on income above €34,500 a year has been introduced.

But the reforms apply to entrants and could take forty years to fully kick in.

Similar delays have applied in the case of reforms on the Continent.

At the same time, the new government rowed back on plans to raise the state pension age to 67 following pressure, in particular from employees who found themselves in a position where they were being retired years before they became eligible for the State pension, being forced to go on social welfare.

The pension system in Ireland is relatively generous but dysfunctional. Our relatively youthful population has provided the State with some breathing space, but this is rapidly running out. Our labour market needs to be redesigned to facilitate longer working lives as part of an overhaul of our pay-as-you-go regime.

Other forms of post-retirement income need to be put in place for a much wider cohort in the population.

The gap between public and private sector pension coverage needs to be reduced. The challenge remains a formidable one. The nettles of reform must be grasped and with this in mind, the public must be brought on board.

There are plenty of politicians who will offer short-term fixes, including tempting offers of reductions in the age of eligibility for pension.

However, if the pension system is left to slowly rot, financially, a heavy burden will be born instead by the young and by their offspring with Peter, in effect, robbing Paul.