THERE is nothing wrong with the basic logic of the government's drive to curb early retirement.

The state is coming to the point when it can no longer afford to pick up the tab for the 2.8 million people between 50 and 65 who are no longer working.

After all, the bill to the Exchequer in lost revenue is already running at £16billion a year and it is added to by the £3billion paid in welfare benefits to people who have retired early.

The government's simple solution is to raise the minimum age for tax advantages on company and private pension schemes from 50 to 55 and to increase the retirement age in the Civil Service from 60 to 65 and to make the rest of the public sector adopt a similar pattern.

But while immutable economic forces may be driving this reform, it does not follow that all older workers will be happily dragged along with it.

For though many of the pre-65s who are retired were in occupations -- like the police or armed forces -- where early departure is obligatory, many more have finished work prematurely out of choice. That there are those in this group who have been assisted to do so at public expense is, of course, unfair on taxpayers, younger and older, who still have to work for their living and save for their retirement.

But while it is also wrong that immense amounts of talent and experience are squandered in the early retirement process, and because many employers are reluctant to recruit older people who still want to do some work, it seems unfair for the government to be putting obstacles in the way of those who want to retire early and can afford to do so without becoming a burden on the state.

There are many like this who have prudently planned and saved in order to enjoy extended leisure years.

And having already rattled the grey-haired voters -- a growing and increasingly powerful electoral force -- with the increase of just 75p in the state pension and broad dismissal of them as a racist and Labour-hostile group, politically the government can ill afford to add to their discontented numbers, even though it is becoming increasingly unable to afford the bill for the millions of premature retirees.