In relation to this section there is an anomaly which I should like to bring to the attention of the Minister. This Bill deals with secondary teachers, primary teachers, and teachers in community and comprehensive schools but the pensions of the 6,500 TUI members in the vocational sector are dealt with by the Department of the Environment. Is there any way in which the Minister could address this problem? It creates problems for local authorities in that where a regional college is set up in an area the local authority will be in funds for a period but there is a major difficulty for them when pensions fall due.
Teachers' Superannuation (Amendment) Bill, 1989: Committee and Final Stages.
Question proposed: "That section 1 stand part of the Bill."
That does not arise under this Bill.
Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 2.
Question proposed: "That section 2 stand part of the Bill."
The main point that emerged during the relatively non-contentious Second Stage debate was that it had taken so long to put the pension arrangements of teachers on a sound statutory basis. It is to the Minister's credit that she is the one who has put it on a statutory basis. Doubts arise however — I put this to her at the time — that other aspects of the Department's work, for example, the payment of teachers who are employed by private institutions but paid by the State, might not have clear statutory authority. Will the Minister indicate if she has any plans to introduce legislation to put other aspects of her Department's work on a sound statutory basis? This should be done so that educational policy can be debated in the House and that there be accountability to the House for it. The only way to develop such a policy is to debate it in the House. Everyone has a contribution to make in this area and democratically elected politicians have a constructive role to play. I hope the Minister will give a commitment to introduce, at an early date, a comprehensive education Bill. My party have initiated work with the aid of senior legal people on the drafting of such a Bill. If the Minister is in any sense tardy in introducing her legislation our work will serve to contribute usefully in this area. Such a Bill should have clear objectives.
A number of Deputies, including Deputies Ahern, Browne and O'Shea, spoke strongly in favour of the introduction of early retirement for teachers. This relates to the Bill in that we are talking about pension arrangements for teachers. Obviously some teachers will not retire early and make places available for younger teachers many of whom are trained in the most up to date educational techniques available. They have to leave the country. However other teachers who were trained perhaps as long ago as 30 years are staying on in schools reluctantly. They would wish to retire but cannot do so because of the pension arrangements. It is important to introduce early retirement.
I made inquiries about tabling an amendment to the Bill to give the Minister power to introduce early retirement but I was advised that it would probably be ruled out of order and that it was likely the Minister had power to do this anyway. Obviously there was no point in pursuing that course so I am raising it now on the section. Will the Minister confirm that she has power to introduce early retirement and will she give an indication of her intention in this regard? I know that the introduction of early retirement has cost implications. It is not something that could be done without taking account of the cost but it would be a valuable initiative from an educational point of view and one which would be much appreciated by young unemployed teachers many of whom have had to emigrate or are contemplating emigration in order to find employment. They are a great loss to the country.
As there is no amendment to the Bill in a specific sense I will reply in a broad way to the two points raised by Deputy John Bruton. He raised a point about the statutory basis for education in general. At a public interview in August last I made my intention very clear about this. I see the very strong need for an education Act and I said so five months ago. I am awaiting reports from the OECD, and Dr. Tom Murphy, which addressed this matter. However, I can say I do intend to proceed along those lines.
I agree with Deputy Bruton that there is a need for wide ranging national, if you like, legislative debate on education. This matter tends to crop up only when debates such as this arise or within the sporadic sparring exchanges that take place within the limited time available to us at Question Time. At best that is quite unsatisfactory with regard to any discussion on education, none of which allows for in-depth analysis, debate or fruitful interaction between the various groups of people about the true basis of education and the need for an education Act. The short answer is: yes, I hope to proceed in that direction. I thank the Deputy for his co-operative words and gestures today.
The second point he raised was that of early retirement. The Deputy asked me to confirm that I had that right. I confirm that I have. The age and conditions under which teachers may retire with a pension and lump sums are contained in schemes implemented under the provisions of the 1928 Act. In the case of national teachers the relevant paragraph is paragraph 11 of the national school teachers' superannuation scheme of 1929. In respect of secondary teachers the relevant paragraph is paragraph 18 of the secondary teachers' superannuation scheme of 1929. Both schemes were implemented under the existing legislative provisions contained in the Teachers Superannuation Act, 1928 and can be amended by Ministers for Education with the consent of Ministers for Finance. Therefore, the House will see that further legislative powers are not required.
With regard to the other points raised by Deputies John Bruton and O'Shea — which correctly do not arise under this Bill — I can say they will be given consideration.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): Deputy Bruton referred to the fact that early retirement would cost money, which is true of course. However, there is another cost involved in this. There are teachers, teaching at this moment, who embarked on a completely different career when they joined the profession. Circumstances have changed so much in the interim that it amounts almost to cruelty to expect them to continue fulfilling a role they never set out to fulfil. Indeed, there is a more costly aspect altogether to this in that children being taught by teachers who are unhappy lose out as well. We must remember that everybody is given one opportunity only to be educated. Therefore, we should do everything possible to ensure that that one opportunity pupils receive is to their maximum benefit. We must remember also that, if that is not the case, it is not the fault of some teachers who may have grown somewhat older or who grew up in an era in which there was quietness and discipline in class. It is unfair to ask them to continue in present circumstances to fulfil an impossible role. Many of our children may have to emigrate, despite our best efforts. Nonetheless, the least we can give them is the best possible educational opportunity in their school years. Even if there is extra cost involved the Minister should balance that against the cost of not doing anything.
The matter does not arise under this Bill.
We are dealing with superannuation.
I might raise two brief points and refer again to the position of teachers in the vocational sector. The TUI have no rights to negotiate pensions on behalf of their members. They cannot negotiate at the teachers' conciliation council or at the local government staff negotiation board. This is unfair and anomalous. I would ask the Minister to examine this matter within whatever context is open to her.
The other point I want to raise is that while national teachers can retire after 35 years service the same does not obtain with regard to teachers in the second level sector. This anomaly should be dealt with effectively and urgently.
Teachers in the vocational sector are employees of local government, now the Department of the Environment. I understand that is the ambit or sphere within which they wish their duties and activities to remain.
The second matter the Deputy raised was the difference in years service, the age at which a national teacher can retire as compared with his or her counterpart in second-level. If ever an effort or start is to be made at examining this issue of early retirement — it is a hypothetical position — that anomaly would have to be addressed before one could progress further. I take the Deputy's point.
The other point the Minister has not dealt with is that the TUI have no forum at which they can negotiate with regard to their members' pensions. Can something be done about that?
In a general way it is not relevant to this Bill. However, the point the Deputy is making is relevant since we are dealing with superannuation. The point the Deputy is making is that those people do not have, if you like, a court of redress. I will bear that aspect in mind in any further discussions.
I should like to put a question to the Minister. Members of the TUI teaching in vocational schools — I think it was back in 1976 when I was a relatively young teacher and when pensions and superannuation were not then my priorities — were given an option, in that we had to sign a document stating whether we would opt to receive our superannuation award and reduced pension if we opted for early retirement for whatever reason; or whether we opted to leave all such rewards until we had reached the statutory age of retirement which was then 65. Does that proviso still stand? Is there any leeway in the provisions of the Bill to deal with that? At that time many teachers did not fully realise its implications. I know of many teachers who, if early retirement was introduced, might opt for it. However, were they tied to an option they chose at that time — to defer any payment or pension until the statutory retirement age — it would lead to an inequality. How do TUI members stand in that regard?
While I know it is up to the Ceann Comhairle to decide, I might say that all of these matters have nothing to do with the Bill before us. But, as they are educational matters I will seek to get the information Deputy Ahearn has requested. However, I should like to inform her that in 1976 the statutory basis of the code was changed to enable the Minister for Finance to devise schemes amending the superannuation terms of civil servants and have such schemes ratified or confirmed by the Oireachtas. Similar statutory provisions were introduced for local authority employees, including vocational teachers, under the Local Government Superannuation Act, 1980. While that may not fully answer Deputy Ahearn's question, in that she asked whether such teachers were still tied to the option they chose as young teachers, I will endeavour to get an answer for her.
I raised a point on Second Stage in regard to caretakers in national schools. Has the Minister any plans to include caretakers in national schools in pension schemes? I might add they are the only group working within the national school sector who have not got a pension scheme.
That matter is not relevant to the Bill before us.
Question put and agreed to.
Section 3 agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment.
Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."
I thank you, Sir, for your guidance on the various Stages of the Bill and I thank the spokespersons and contributors from all sides for what is very necessary amending legislation.
Question put and agreed to.