IT’S a brave (some would say supremely confident) Prime Minister that takes on the grey vote. General election campaigns are traditionally the time when the parties clamour to attract older people - who are more likely to vote than any other group - with tempting inducements such as pension hikes and free TV licences.

With this in mind, the Conservative manifesto will have come as a big shock to many pensioners, containing as it did not one, not two, but three big policy pledges that will hit them in the pocket. If Theresa May wins, then, the so-called triple lock on pensions, which guarantees an annual increase of at least 2.5 per cent, will end. Winter fuel payments will be means tested. And, in the most sweeping and controversial change of all, those with more than £100k in assets will have to pay for the social care they receive at home from value of their property, to be recouped upon death.

I should point out that the last two policies will not apply in ScotlandHolyrood is responsible for making such changes here. And, if MSPs are sensible, they will consider doing just that.

As readers of this column will know, I’m no big fan of the Tories. But at least Mrs May is brave enough to publicly recognise that one of the main fault lines in this ever more divided and disunited kingdom is between wealthy Baby Boomers and everybody else. Her suggestion that home care should be paid for with home-accumulated wealth is a first much-needed step towards a fairer inter-generational distribution of wealth.

You’ll often hear older people telling younger relatives about how hard they’ve worked, how they paid into the system and thus deserve their generous pensions and benefits. Few, however, are prepared to admit that much of the wealth they now hold and enjoy in their retirement was accumulated not through hard work, but the luck of a property market that has risen in value beyond all expectations to obscene levels; a market that locks many young people – a large number of whom are lumbered with student debt, stagnant wages and inflated rent bills – out of the certainties taken for granted by their parents and grandparents.

Many Baby Boomers also enjoy generous final salary pension schemes the likes of which people like myself, in their forties, can only dream of – and since they are healthier than any previous generation, they’re living longer to enjoy them.

At the same time, our social care system is buckling under a structure that is financially untenable, struggling to offer the quality of care we would want for ourselves and our loved ones. Tory austerity only exacerbated the deepening problems of our ageing population, of course. But something will have to give if we are to improve social care standards in the short, medium and long term – and a share of your vastly inflated property wealth is surely as good place as any to start.

Older people will be distraught, no doubt, at the thought of not being able to pass the full value of their homes to their children. Many offspring, meanwhile, will, let’s face it, be panicking that they may not be able to fund their own retirements in the way they thought.

But surely it is fairer and more equitable to pool the distribution of inter-generational wealth more widely within society, spending the cash on improvements to a service the vast majority of us and our communities will either require, or at least consider a major priority? With £100k of assets left untouched, there will still be a relatively generous legacy available. A consequence of the policy could also be the cooling down of the property market, and who wouldn’t welcome that?

I don’t agree with Mrs May on many things, but I welcome the conversation that this policy will force us to have. It’s high time we had it, both individually, and as a society.