asked the Minister for Education whether it is his intention to base the pensions of national teachers who retired between the 1st April, 1934, and 1st April, 1938, on their full salary and not on the salary less the cut of 5 per cent., which was restored on the 1st April, 1938; and, if so, when he proposes to introduce the necessary financial resolution to give effect to that decision.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Teachers' Pensions.
The reply to the first part of the question is in the negative. The second part of the question does not arise.
Arising out of the Minister's reply, is it not true that only a few hundred men and women, all elderly persons, are affected by this cut in their pensions, and that it amounts in no case to more than £10 a year; that its restoration would create a rapidly diminishing charge, and that the failure to restore this wretchedly small sum will establish a deep sense of grievance amongst a very restricted class of persons? In the light of these facts, would the Minister not consider doing this act of grace in respect of the few teachers who retired in those two or three critical years?
A Chinn Comhairle, the Government take the position that to do what the Deputy asks would involve a change in principle, because the recent increase of 5 per cent. in the salaries and allowances of national teachers was granted in view of the changed economic conditions since 1934, and it is not to be regarded as a restoration of the cut imposed by the settlement of that year. Therefore, there is no question, in our view, of any modification in the present method of calculating pensions.
Is it not the situation that a cut of 5 per cent. was made for one reason some years ago, and that, technically for an entirely different reason, 5 per cent. was given back some months ago? The net result of that is that those who resigned between those two dates have suffered a cut in their pensions which no other teachers who resign will have to suffer. Though you may explain the principle, it affects this miserably small body of men. As a pure act of grace, could we not give it to them and specifically reserve the principle? Let us specifically reserve the principle in making the act of grace and point out it is not an admission of principle, and I feel sure that neither the teachers' organisation nor anybody else will seek to quote it as a precedent if the Minister will consider that line.
I have already expressed the view that the Government, if they were to do this, would be admitting the principle that the cuts imposed in connection with the pension settlement of 1934 have been restored. We are not prepared to admit that principle. I have already informed the representatives of the teachers' organisation that that is the position, and I have nothing further to add to what I have already said.