Bob I think what Alfred is referring to is how ‘interpreting’ policy one way or another could result in significant savings. Significant enough to ride out the outrage bus!
If that proves so then only when results of every interpretation option are analysed will a decision be made. It reminds me of the FRI3 rollout.
In short the FRI3 offer was have cash if you have an IPP between these dates. The key being the use of IPP.
What ‘they’ forgot was the not insignificant number of SSC commissions who had transferred to PC after the switch to 40/20. They all had a 16 year IPP in the window but not an exit date.
Initial interpretation was off you jog chancers, until the desperate need for aircrew arose which was when the ‘interpretation’ changed.
All in the detail and what you can legally get away with.
it still makes me laugh at how it was genuinely considered moral to ‘interpret’ the definition of IPP but there you go.
Forewarned is forearmed!