THANK you Ian Gorst. Just … thank you. It seemed that this 2011 election, what with its GST on food, and its school milk, and its coastal developments all seemed so dull, so familiar and so boring. So very 2008.

But now it’s not. Now it’s bigger, better, faster. Now it’ll make your hair shine and your teeth sparkle and your clothes keep their colours for longer.

Now it’s a new election for a new generation, with a new killer ingredient. And what is that killer ingredient? Glad you asked. It goes by the name of ‘How many more years would you like your voters to work for?’ and everyone standing for election this year has to have a go at answering. Beautiful, isn’t it?

There is just no right side of this issue to stand on. It calls to mind what Aaron Sorkin wrote about social security being ‘the third rail of American politics: if you touch it, you die’.

Options include: Yes, you should all work until you drop; No, but Social Security charges are going to go up by around 50% for everyone; and, We’ll just pop it all on employers’ contributions and no one will have a job and that’ll be easier all round.

Faced with choices like that, you can’t help thinking that Deputy Gorst – who is running for Senator in October, don’t forget – may not be winning any popularity polls among his political colleagues after dropping this little bombshell last week. He may not even be winning popularity contests among the public, either, which is a slightly scarier thought, what with him being, you know, one of the few politicians to inspire any faith or hope in the States Chamber.

But enough about that. The point about retirement age is that it is the perfect election issue. It’s an issue that immediately affects everyone in as direct and personal a way as you can imagine; it’s a question that cannot be ducked because the deficit is looming; and it’s a question with a million possible answers, all of which are equally bad.

Given that in the last election campaign, candidates came out with nonsensical puff like ‘We shouldn’t rezone any more green fields unnecessarily’ or ‘I won’t increase GST unless I have to’ – because there’s obviously such a huge lobby for building in the countryside and raising taxes for the sheer hell of it – it is encouraging that there’s an issue looming both for this crop of States Members, who will have to make a really hard decision before the election, and the lot that follow them.

Scrutiny, having survived the row over the speed limit debate in the States last week, has picked itself up, dusted itself off, hauled itself back to the top of the cliff and is threatening to hurl itself off all over again.

Having been told two weeks ago by the Scrutiny Chairmen’s Committee that he could chair a review of the Airport despite getting paid for running the International Air Display, Deputy Mike Higgins was told by the committee last week that he couldn’t, but that it was OK for him to sit on the panel.

There are two things to say about this. First, either you’re in conflict or you’re not – if it’s OK for him to sit on the panel, then it’s OK for him to chair it.

Second, it is entirely open to Deputy Higgins to keep saying he won’t reveal how much he gets paid for organising the International Air Display – it is properly declared on this entry in the Register of States Members’ Interests, and he is entirely within his rights to refuse to reveal the figure. That’s fine.

But what he can’t do is refuse to reveal the payment, and then continue to give it the big one about ministerial secrecy and public sector salaries. Either way is absolutely fine – but he has got to decide.

And while on the subject of Scrutiny, it’s interesting to note that the Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny panel’s reports on exam results will be delayed, possibly until the start of next month.

Not interesting because of anything that’s going to be in the report itself (although it might be), or because it’s a particularly important issue (although it really is), but because so many of the key players are having a break that they can’t get it checked and signed off.

There is nearly a month between States sittings because of the Easter break. Even schoolchildren only need three weeks for Easter. Do politicians really need a month?