That is interesting - "a percentage of GDP". I wonder how much faith Hutton has in GDP?
On page 97 of the Final Report, Hutton says
4.31 One advantage of using the GDP measure is that in theory it will give a good degree of predictability for government about costs in the future and, since tax revenues are highly correlated with levels of GDP, it will also ensure that commitments remain affordable.
4.32 However, this measure is very difficult to control as it is influenced by a large number of variables outside the control of pension schemes costs such as future levels of GDP and the size of the public sector workforce. Having considered these factors the Commission has determined that this option is not viable.
I wonder if "not viable" is different to "fatuous" (but I truly admit that I quote
Capot's word out of its proper context)