It is but 12.2% plus the amount of surplus run down over that period is approximately equal to 26.8%. In the absence of any surplus the NATS contribution rate will have to equal underlying rate.
My point exactly. NATS should
NOThave run down the surplus. The actual surplus is a red herring as it only refers to
CURRENT 
pension commitments. The surplus is irrelevant. NATS needed to keep paying at the
UNDERLYING RATE to ensure that there will be enough funds to meet future Pensioners' needs. Naturally a surplus will build up as the funds will be required at a later date!
If NATS paid more than the underlaying rate, then yes, future underlying costs would drop and this fabled surplus might be 80% or more.
But as long as people live longer, and/or fewer people pay into the scheme (staff cuts/
no new joiners) and/or inflation stays high (will it?) then the future underlying costs will keep increasing.
NATS are telling us of the huge increase in underlying costs, yet they have paid only just enough to make current pensioners' payments
..I hope I won't need to write another play... surely eglnyt can see...I'll keep my script writing hat on standby
