asked the Minister for Education if he will consider the cases of national teachers in receipt of superannuation pensions of less than £110 a year with a view to bringing their basis of superannuation into line with the new salary scales prescribed in 1920.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Pensions of National Teachers.
I regret that I am unable to add anything to previous replies given to questions regarding an increase to superannuated teachers. I would refer the Deputy to the reply given by the Minister for Finance in answer to a question by Deputy Coogan on 29th November last.
I do not remember what his answer was, but I should like to inquire of him, is it not manifestly inequitable that the reform secured on behalf of teachers in this country in 1920 should be applicable to every teacher who was then in the profession and to those who came in thereafter, but that the very few survivors who bore the heat and burden of the day to get those increases from the British Government should be denied the right of having their pensions brought up to the level that they would have been entitled to had the 1920 scales been in operation? I say this, especially in view of the new principle laid down by the Minister himself when he abolished the contributory element in the national teachers' pensions scheme and accepted it as a State liability. Did not that imply that, inasmuch as the contributory element no longer existed, all teachers in the public service would have their pensions related to the salary scales without differentiation? Yet, you have a miscroscopic group of teachers who retired prior to 1920, and who are living, in some cases, on £1 a week. Surely, in respect of the pre-1920 teachers something might be done for the very few years of life left to them, and not have them die under an unjustifiable sense of grievance.
I cannot agree that the pension settlement under which the liability was placed on the State for teachers' superannuation involves an obligation to relate the superannuation any time to the existing cost-of-living conditions.
To the salary scales.
Or to the salary scales. There is no such obligation. Furthermore, although the group in question is not a large one, it is obvious that this particular group cannot be dealt with apart from the question of teacher-pensioners in general of whom there are over 3,000, I think. As the Minister for Finance explained in the answer I have referred to, the question of teacher-pensioners cannot be dealt with apart from superannuated persons who have retired from the public service or, indeed, the other classes of pensioners. The whole question of dealing with pensioners in this manner has been considered by the Government and a decision has been reached, and I see no prospect of that decision being repealed.
If the Irish National Teachers' Organisation were prepared to waive any question of principle, and say that they would regard the concession in respect of this small group of pre-1920 teachers as a pure act of grace—nobody to use it hereafter as a precedent for dealing with other groups—would the Minister then consider this small group on their merits?
That is a hypothetical question.
It is, and the Minister can give a hypothetical answer.
Obviously, the question raises whether any particular class can be dealt with and at the same time ignore much larger classes who will feel that they are in the same category.
I am only pleading for the small group of pre-1920 teachers.