So are you suggesting that guys who have paid £25-30000 (make that £40k allowing for inflation) during the time when they were also pretty much struggling and then pay another £4-5k, in a single whack, should further 'subsidise' the guys starting out?
They should certainly pay the EGU or wherever subs, but they are tiny by comparison.
The real error was enshrining the numbers in the constitution - though fair enough having the concept. With increased life expectancy, the benefit of Life Membership has increased markedly. There does, however, need to be a 'fair' way to change the numbers - towards 35 years and 5 years at age 70 for example - over some period. And to have some sort of review periodically - but not simply set. Of course, another 5 years could see waiting lists back - though i doubt it!
