Vol. 540 No. 2
26 Mr. Broughan asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the publication date for the pensions Bill; his views on the growing disquiet regarding occupational pensions from both the public and private sector; his further views on the low level of workers in the private sector who have occupational pensions; the actions he is undertaking to manage the pensions situation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20085/01]
Following agreement at Cabinet yesterday, I propose to publish the Pensions (Amendment) Bill, 2001, probably around 17 July. One of the key features of this Bill is the provision of a legislative framework for the introduction and regulation of a new savings vehicle, the personal retirement savings account – PRSA, draft details of which I published on 12 April. PRSAs were recommended by the Pensions Board in its report on the national pensions policy initiative as a vehicle to facilitate increased savings for pensions and extend supplementary pensions coverage overall, especially to people who have no such cover at present. The ultimate objective is that some 70% of the workforce, aged over 30, would have supplementary pension provision. It is up to all the social partners to play their part in achieving this target.
Under the terms of the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness, the trends in supplementary pensions coverage will be monitored by my Department in consultation with the Pensions Board, allowing the role of PRSAs to be evalu ated and further action, if necessary, to be taken. I should point out that the Government has already taken action and made significant progress on a number of pension issues including the establishment of a pensions reserve fund to partly offset the future cost of pensions. The significant increases in the rate of social welfare pensions over the past four years demonstrates that the position of pensioners is very much a priority of this Government.
The Bill which is complex also includes provision for the establishment of a pensions ombudsman.
I have three brief questions. The Labour Party and I suppose the rest of the Opposition are bitterly disappointed that we have reached the end of this session, and concieveably the end of this Dáil, without sight of the pensions Bill. Will the Minister agree this perhaps was the primary responsibility he had, but he has not delivered on it? All we got was a briefing on PRSAs a few months ago. Will he agree that a serious deficiency under his administration is that he did not deliver on the pensions Bill?
Does he agree with my colleague, the vice-president of SIPTU, Jack O'Connor, who said at the recent SIPTU conference that perhaps up to 65% of workers in the private sector do not have an occupational pension? He will be aware that the great growth in jobs as a result of the economic boom in recent years has been in the private sector, therefore, we are talking about hundreds of thousands of workers not having an occupational pension. What does he propose to do about that before his administration ends?
Will he agree that there is a growing band of pensioners waiting in the long grass for him, the Taoiseach and this Administration? I am talking about secondary teachers, taxi men and pensioners such as those from the Irish Press group, the Ford motor company, about whom we have all been circulated in recent months, and Tara Mines, health board ancillary staff, nurses, teachers, Aer Lingus, Aer Rianta and I could go on. There is a major problem in pension provision here. The Minister has had four years and one month to address that, but he has not delivered and people are now left in a difficult position.
That was a good deal of rhetoric from the Deputy as usual but the reality is that this legislation is extremely complex and because of that it took a considerable time to go through the draftsman's office. I do not accept what the Deputy said. He referred to this matter as my primary responsibility which it is not. My primary responsibility is to deliver social welfare payments to more than 850,000 people per week.
I was talking about for the future, for the workers of this country.
The Deputy referred to Mr. O'Connor, who is part of the trade union movement represented on NIPPI and who was part of the process that was the genesis for this legislation. The trade union movement had the ability to influence decisions on this, which I understand were quite significant, as were those of representatives of employers and others on NIPPI. What we are bringing forward in the coming week is the fruit of the work of those in the trade union movement, such as Mr. O'Connor and others, yet the Deputy is using him, to a certain extent, as a critique of what is being done here. Historically there has been a low level of pension cover here and that is the reason we are bringing forward this legislation. This Government is doing that. The Deputy was in government for many years over the period since 1990—
Not I, Minister. I am still waiting.
The Deputy might get a chance sooner than he thinks.
Deputy Broughan should not abdicate responsibility. His party was in government. This reform is under this Government and the previous reform was under a Government of which my party was a part.
We are grateful for the PRSAs. Sections 91 to 120 of the Bill show how complex it is. Would it not have been better to have introduced this Bill two years ago? At that time the Minister would have had two years to do that. He has now had four years to do this. Why was there such a delay? The Bill will be published during the summer recess to enable the Minister's PR machine to spoof about what is being done while we, on this side of the House, know nothing has been done.
Every time we met the Pensions Board at the Committee on Social, Community and Family Affairs, we heard that the key new development required was a pensions ombudsman. When pensioners such as those from Tara Mines or Ford company contact us they nearly always want to know what is happening regarding the pension surplus and why their pensions are not indexed. If investments are doing very well, why is the money not being transferred to the pensioners? Why did the Mnister not at least bring forward a short Bill to establish a pensions ombudsman? He could have done that, but he did not.
The Bill will include provision for the establishment of a pensions ombudsman. The Deputy should not hoodwink the pensioners he meets because legislation cannot be implemented retrospectively. The various schemes to which he referred are subject to contract law. Passing legislation today would not rewrite a contract that was made between workers and trustees. The Deputy should not hoodwink those people.
They will be waiting in the long grass for you.
You would like to think that.
I ask Members to address the Chair.
