ALL parties have mentioned their desire for greater equality this election. It’s perceived as simply being a redistribution from rich to poor. The gap between the haves and have nots increasing, and damaging our society. However, there’s a need to address inter-generational inequality, a more prosperous elderly versus a poorer younger generation. For the first time in centuries a succeeding generation will be poorer than their parents. A shameful inheritance bequeathed.

It is the Tories who have come closest to raising the issue with their positioning on the pensions triple lock and then on social care costs. However, no sooner had Theresa May put her head above the parapet than she ran for cover.

The handling of the proposals on social care were certainly not strong and stable. Moreover, nor were they part of a plan to redistribute wealth between generations, or even at all. The plans were simply a cost-saving measure to address the looming Brexit disaster, whilst maintaining the untouchability of the very wealthy who resolve it all through trust funds long before the issue arises. Taxes on wealth, whether generational or otherwis,e seem sacrosanct to the Tories though housing benefit can be removed from the young and arbitrary refusals of 80 per cent imposed on benefit applications.

The proposals were roundly condemned by other parties who vied with each other in pledges to protect pensioners. For sure the level of state pension in this country is shameful, but the issues of pensioner poverty are being overtaken by in-work poverty and the plight of the young. There needs to be a redistribution of wealth from the rich but also in the burden being borne by the young.

Sadly, all parties have run away from that. The desire to protect pensioners is laudable but support for the young isn’t offset by pledges on student fees. It happens as politics reflects the power of the voters and the old vote more than the young. It has always been that way. Voting is often an acquired practice part of what Henry Milner described as “civic literacy”.

Learned from workmates, trade unions and community activism, it took cajoling or a crisis that arose to show the necessity of it. However, as our industrial base and society have changed, so have voting patterns. Gone are large employers and unions, council housing and tenant activism, replaced by Uber and zero-hours contracts, buy to let and AirBnB. The cause of much of the woe for the young isn’t of their own making, any more than the limited inheritance they are to receive. Hopefully, the current registration drives will reap returns.

I was at a football reunion where some had their bus pass, others were expecting it soon. We reminisced about abundant employment opportunities, available council housing and the ability to get on the property ladder. Halcyon days maybe. But it’s not like that now and pledges on student fees are insufficient to offset the tilting that has taken place of power and wealth.

Of course, there was concern for those who have lost out as pension ages have been changed and concern over the welfare of ageing parents. Some at the event enjoyed their bus pass and all wanted to secure their pension. However, greater concern was expressed for children and grandchildren. Apprehension about the young who may never see a pension at all, yet are expected to fund the pensions of their elders. Children with good degrees but no job prospects. Youngsters with no likelihood of ever buying a home and struggling to meet rents.

A fairer society isn’t just about inequality between rich and poor. It’s complex, but society must debate this, not just see shameless election pitches. The burden of austerity cannot see the young sacrificed to protect the elderly. It’s time for some inter-generational equality.