In an election year such as this, issues affecting all facets of society get some attention. Sadly, however the 2012 electioneering campaign has so far avoided issues affecting the elderly or the aged. The elderly, as are being defined here, are persons aged 60 years and above.

It is indeed refreshing that Dr Michael Kpessa Whyte, the Convenor of the Centre for Policy Research, has called for a relook at pensions, especially as pertains to protecting poor people.

We support the suggestion even though we are not oblivious of the fact that the Social Security and National Insurance Trust (SSNIT) mechanism is there to cater for older citizens who have retired from active service either by reaching retirement age or through a misfortune that has rendered them incapable. We also acknowledge that mechanisms such as the state-sponsored Livelihood Empowerment Against Poverty (LEAP) and the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) exist to cater for the needs of elderly people.

One can justifiably argue, however, that the existing mechanisms are inadequate and not comprehensive enough, considering their reach. Indeed, Dr Kpessah Whyte is right when he says that these support systems ?address a small component of social protection.

The concept of social protection, as argued by organisations such as the Integrated Social Development Centre (ISODEC), posits that there needs to be an integrated social protection system that will provide a minimum level of rights and entitlements for every citizen as a societal insurance against loss of employment, food insecurity, education, health, water, and to integrate marginalised, excluded and minority groups into society.

Recognising that poverty may lead to exclusion from core social services, ISODEC makes the point that poverty is not just about low income or consumption levels; it is equally about vulnerability, exclusion and isolation, poor governance, and powerlessness. People?s priorities and experiences are affected by such variables as gender, social exclusion, intra-household allocation of resources, incidence of crime and violence, geographical location, access to networks of support, and relations with those in power.

So SSNIT, with its low coverage hardly meets the social protection criteria. Likewise, the LEAP?s coverage of around 60,000 poverty-stricken households in 100 districts in the country is far from perfect. Perhaps, the exemption of elderly from paying NHIS premium is the only all-encompassing policy but the bottlenecks encumbering the NHIS water down the effect of this arrangement.

Again on the SSNIT, the fact is that it exists for those who have made contributions to it. The truth is that many of those we classify as elderly today did not have opportunity in their youthful days to be educated and gainfully employed and so could not have made contributions to SSNIT. Thus, many of them cannot boast of any savings, including SSNIT contributions, made in preparation for their pension.

In the absence of social pensions, the elderly have adopted coping mechanisms such as eating less food; skipping meals; dwelling in the streets; borrowing cash; selling valued assets; self-medication and resort to traditional medicine. The risk factors associated with these mechanisms, according to Dr Kpessah Whyte, include alcoholism, obesity and high blood pressure.

We, therefore, associate ourselves with his recommendation for an allocation of one per cent of the gross domestic product to the elderly. We also see as tenable the suggestion that the state should set up day-care facilities for the elderly to be in charge of children while parents are working.

When we hearken to this call, we would be agreeing that: ?The elderly were once young and we need to give them a decent life, hoping that when we are aged we will also have decent lives.