Britain's government spending binge is not just inflating civil-service wages: public-sector pensions are rising too. Indeed, the cost of financing them has shot up from £340bn (yes, billion) to £460bn in the last two years.

At the same time, these public-sector pensions have come under a lot of criticism. Many of them are index-linked, with generous early retirement and sickness clauses. The official retirement age is just 60 when the rest of us are expected to slog on to 65. Independent experts say the true financing cost is nearer to £700bn than £460bn. And graduates in the civil service earn more than those in private business, so why should they get more generous and secure pensions too?

Alarmed by the cost, the government threatened (earlier this year) to slash the civil-servants' benefits, and make 5m public employees work to age 65. The mandarins held a one-day stoppage in protest. But hardly anyone noticed, and the government continued to talk tough.

Then suddenly now, the tough talk has evaporated. The government is watering down its plans. Staff in their 50s will still retire at 60, and even someone aged 20 would only have to work another two-and-a-half years to get the same pension. A big chunk of the planned savings will go into TUC backed schemes to bring part-time workers into the system. And an order forcing local-government staff to work to 65 has been revoked.

So what has changed to turn tough talk on making savings into an appeasement of the civil-service unions? Could it be the fact that the general election is now out of the way?