We can discuss motions Nos. 2 and 3 together.
National School Teachers' Superannuation (Amendment) Scheme, 1967: Motion.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
I move:
That the National School Teachers' Superannuation (Amendment) Scheme, 1967, made by the Minister for Education with the consent of the Minister for Finance, be confirmed.
The main purpose of these amending schemes is to bring the statutory requirements relating to abatement of pension in the case of retired national and secondary school teachers into line with other classes of public service pensioners who were involved in the Pensions (Abatement) Act, 1965. For this purpose also it is provided that the abatement provisions shall have effect as from 1st January, 1965, the same date as in that Act.
Under existing provisions the pension of a retired teacher who is appointed to a post for which he is paid salary from public funds has his pension abated or suspended entirely, depending on the amount of the remuneration of his new post. These amending schemes remove the provision for abatement or suspension of the pension in the case where a retired teacher is employed otherwise than in the teaching service in which he served immediately before retirement. In certain circumstances also the Minister for Education may waive the application of the abatement provisions in the case of a retired teacher who is re-employed in the teaching service.
Other amendments—of a relatively minor nature—being effected by the amending schemes are as follows:
Paragraphs 7 of both schemes enable a simplification of existing procedures for the award of pensions to be effected so as to make for greater expedition in this regard.
Paragraphs 8 of both schemes place a limit of 40 years to the total of pensionable service with which a person may be credited in the two teaching services, national and secondary. This is the maximum period reckonable under all single schemes.
Paragraphs 9 (1) and 11 of the national teachers' amendment scheme revise the existing financial arrangements in the case of teachers who die within twelve months of retirement without having claimed a pension. The effect of this provision is to enable a claim for pension to be made by the teacher's legal personal representative so that entitlement to pension between the date of retirement and the date of death may be established and a payment of pension and lump sum made if this would be greater than a year's salary.
Paragraph 10 of this amendment scheme provides for the award of pensionable credit to a teacher for a certain period of service given by him in the employment of the Irish Folklore Commission before his re-entry into the teaching service.
I ask the House to approve of these amending schemes which I am sure it will be agreed are of a non-controversial nature.
I welcome this provision, as we do any provisions of this kind in regard to abatement of pensions. They are very welcome and in some cases overdue. Perhaps the Minister could expand a little on his statement that in certain circumstances the Minister may waive the application of the abatement provisions in the case of a retired teacher who is re-employed in the teaching service. Are these circumstances, in fact, the conditions that are laid down in paragraph 3 (b) of the Secondary Teachers' Superannuation Scheme? That is a case in point. Is that what the Minister is referring to? If so, is this a discretionary power? Is it something in which the Minister has a discretion and why is it necessary that it be discretionary? Why does he feel the need to say "Yes" or "No"? Why is it not something that can be settled? I should like to hear the Minister further on this point.
I also note that the Order is signed by the Minister in the Irish version of his name. I am wondering whether there is any significance in that. Is it related to the fact that his appointment is under the Irish version of his name or is it the Minister's option? The opposite is adopted by the other Minister in countersigning. I should like to hear the rationale of the Minister using one from and the Minister for Finance another.
I should like to hear the Minister's comments on the points he made; that it is, first of all, for the abatement normally applied to a teacher who resumes his teaching in one or other branch but that the Minister may, in certain circumstances, have this abatement waived. I am sure the Minister is as convinced as I am that a teacher who is retired is very frequently not merely fully qualified but extraordinarily well qualified by his experience to take up teaching in another branch, sometimes as a secondary teacher. A primary school teacher having retired may have many useful years of secondary school teaching. I am sure if the Minister has full discretionary powers he will use them wisely in such circumstances. I hope the Minister will give some amplification on that.
Apart from that question, there are two general points I should like to raise. The first is that I am disappointed that in relation to pensions of all kinds in which the State has a measure of responsibility, the State has not yet seen fit to link pension rates to existing salary rates and, in particular, to salary rates which have been increased. It has always seemed to me that if the present rise in the cost of living is so marked that it has justified an increase in, say, civil servants' salaries or in the case of teachers' salaries in the primary schools or teachers' increments in the secondary schools, if the cost of living has so gone up as to warrant increases in salaries, then quite clearly an increase in pension rates ought automatically in all justice follow on that. It seems to me manifestly unjust that people who are living on pensions which are clearly lower than salaries are expected to continue for a long time at the old rate despite a significant rise in the cost of living, so significant that salaries have to be increased.
I should like to hear the Minister on this point. I realise that so far no change in general Government attitude on this has been indicated and I realise also that probably all civil servants' and teachers' pensions would have to be geared to the cost of living together. It is probable that teachers' pensions could not be raised independently. On the other hand, it is inconceivable that the Minister in this as in other matters might give a lead and might decide that pensioned teachers should have their pensions automatically increased with the rise in the cost of living. It would, in my submission, be a comparatively simple thing to do, to link pension rates to existing salary rates so that if salaries or increments went up automatically——
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
I should like to point out to the Senator that this is outside the present order. To make the point once is outside but to make it twice is doubly outside.
It is omitted from this order. The other point I should like to make is that under the existing pension schemes there is, as I understand it, neither in the secondary teachers' pension scheme nor the primary teachers' pension scheme, provision for widows' pensions. When we are talking about compensation for derelict sites or about the question of ground rents many Senators get up and are very concerned with widows and that most of the ground rents in this country and most of the derelict sites are owned by seriously impoverished widows whose existence would be jeopardised if we were to do anything to reduce the compensation for ground rents or derelict sites. But when it is a question of pensions the attitude of the State, the official attitude and the attitude of our society is that widows get not one penny. This is manifestly unjust.
I think a joint salary which is meant to keep a man, his wife and family is given, scaled and calculated on the basis of keeping, first of all, a man and his wife and family and then the pension, which is clearly less, is meant to keep the man and his wife. I do not think that anybody, least of all the Minister, could really condone that a teacher's salary in Ireland today is such as to enable him to make enormous savings towards some kind of income or annuity for his wife, if he dies. Yet the State, under Orders such as this, makes no provision at all, and made no attempt under the original Act, to provide any pension at all for the widow. I would say it is high time we took into account the fact that a widow is left destitute if a pension, such as is provided for here, ceases with the death of the pensioner. I would put it to the Minister that we look forward to perhaps some more radical alteration of the original Act upon the two scores I have mentioned; one, grading pension rates to cost of living increases and, two, the provision of equitable pensions for widows which should, in my opinion, represent at least half of existing pension rates.
Níor cheart liom an ócáid seo a ligint tharam gan mo bhuíochas a ghabháil leis an Aire faoin scéim leasuithe seo a thabhairt isteach. Bhí de láíocht ag an Aire agus ag oifigigh na Roinne na leasuithe seo a chur faoi bhráid Chomhairle Idiréitigh na Meánmhúinteoirí sul má thug sé os comhair Tithe an Oireachtais iad, rud a bhí dlite do réir an chonartha atá againn leis an Aire Oideachais agus an Aire Airgeadais. Marach sin, bheadh a lán ceisteanna agam le cur ar an Aire anois. Ach míníodh na leasuithe go sásúil dúinn agus táimid sásta gur ar mhaithe le múinteoirí i gcoitinne na leasuithe seo. Tabharfaidh siad Scéim Aoisliúntais na Meánmhúinteoirí ar aon chéim le scéimeanna eile do réir an Achta a ritheadh anseo cúpla bliain ó shin.
Más buan mo chuimhne, seo é an 13ú leasú ar an Acht a chéad-ritheadh sa bhliain 1929. Fágann sin go bhfuil sé ag éirí níos deacra in aghaidh na bliana aon eolas cruinn a chur air ag duine nach bhfuil i dtaithí air. Mhol mé anseo cheana cúpla bliain ó shin nuair a bhí leasú eile os comhair an tSeanaid agus duine eile ina Aire, go ndéanfaí an Scéim a chódú agus é ar fad a thabhairt faoi aon chlúdach amháin. Ach cé gur dona liom an oiread sin mion-leasuithe scaoilte a bheith ann, feictear dom gur fearr fanacht tamall eile chun an comhdlúthú a dhéanamh toisc go bhfuil roinnt eile leasuithe atá práinneach agus nach mór iad a dhéanamh gan mórán achair. Tá aicmí nua múinteoirí ag éirí inár measc nach mór freastal orthu agus iad go léir a thabhairt faoi scáth Scéim na Meánmhúinteoirí.
Ba mhaith liom freisin treisiú leis an achainí atá deánta ag an Seanadóir Sheehy Skeffington ar son na mbaintreach. Tá gluaiseachtaí ar bun i dtíortha eile, agus anseo chomh maith, chun foláramh a dhéanamh i scéimeanna aoisliúntais do bhaintreacha agus do dhílleachtaí. Mar a chéile agus an Seanadóir Sheehy Skeffington ní fhéadfainn a mheas go mbeadh barr feabhais ar an scéim s'againne gan foláramh de chineál eicínt a bheith ann dá leithéidí. Tá scéim i bhfeidhm i Sasana cheana féin do mhúinteoirí agus cead acu síntiúisí breise a íoc chun a chinntiú nach bhfágfar baintreacha agus dílleachtaí gan teacht isteach d'aon sórt acu má sciobann an bás an múinteroir nó an pinsinéir múinteora. Tá tús déanta anseo leis an mBille a ritheadh le gairid ag cur pinsean ar fáil do bhaintreacha foireann an Ard-Institiúid Oideachais. Scéim ranníocaíochta atá acu sin mar a chéile agus an ceann s'againne. Ní léir dom aon chúis nach bhféadfái an prionsabal céanna a chur i gcionn ar Scéim Aoisliúntais na Meánmhúinteoirí. Is fuiriste go mór é a dhéanamh le scéim ranníocaíochta.
Is fear é an tAire a bhfuil léirithe aige go bhfuil ar a chumas an rud mór a dhéanamh, briseadh go hiomlán le sean-nósa agus le sean-mhodhanna smaointe. D'iarrfainn air cúis seo na mbaintreach agus na ndílleachtaí i leith phinsin a bhreithniú chomh luath agus is féidir.
Like the other Senators who spoke, I welcome this amendment to the pension scheme for national teachers but, like Senator Ó Conalláin, I think the time has come for codification of these pension schemes. Amendments have been introduced here in a piecemeal fashion. On a few occasions I have tired to set out in the form of articles something which would be a guide to teachers with regard to pensions. Really, it was impossible to make head or tail of the jungle of instruments that have been introduced here over the years. I am not blaming the Minister for that; this has developed over the years long before his time. The thing should be rationalised and the information should be available to people in a readily understandable form. There are, we understand, several other amendments lined up and some of them are very urgent with regard to people who gave service in preparatory colleges and who, after the preparatory colleges had been closed down, had to go back into national teaching service and some of them into secondary. Some of these people have now come to retire and no credit has been given to them, as yet, for their service under the Department in the preparatory colleges. This is an urgent matter; as a matter of fact, some of these people are about to retire this year. But it only goes to show how hopeless is the position we are in in respect of rationalisation and codification of the various pension rights.
Whilst the ideas set forth by Dr. Sheehy Skeffington with regard to parity of pensions is most desirable— we all seek it and think it is the only reasonable thing to do in arriving at an estimation of a person's pension, which should be based on current salary—still I should like to avail myself of this opportunity of thanking the Minister and the Government for the significant increase made recently in the matter of pensions for those who retired before the 1st February, 1964. Teachers and others paid out of public funds are, indeed, appreciative of the step forward made by the Government but still they seek after the ideal enunciated by Dr. Sheehy Skeffington.
I should also like to lend my support to the payment of pensions to widows. Year after year teachers' congresses have asked that a scheme of widows' pensions be introduced. As a matter of fact, it is on the agenda of an executive meeting for next Saturday. But, of course, one has to appreciate that the whole pensionable group must be taken into account in this respect. Maybe a particular case cannot be made for teachers alone but it is a matter which should be examined by the Government. It is overdue and its introduction will obviate a lot of hardship suffered by many teachers, especially the widows of teachers who die young.
There is one other point in the instrument which I welcome. It is in section 11—the amendment of paragraph 22, section 2 of the current scheme where the person who is incapable of making a claim for a pension and a gratuity is now given the opportunity of having the claim made on his behalf. Up to this there has been considerable delay and hardship necessitated to the dependants particularly of people who are incapacitated and unable to make a claim for pension and gratuity. Also section 2 (b) is most welcome where the legal representatives can in the case of a person who has died within 12 months of retirement and has been up to this unable to make a claim for pension and gratuity. These are welcome amendments. Generally any instrument introduced here to improve the pension scheme is most welcome indeed. However, we still think rationalisation and qualification of all the instruments in the past should be made.
One of the matters mentioned by Senator FitzGerald would be appropriate to paragraph 9 and the effect of this is to replace a paragraph in the 1929 Scheme. This is to bring the secondary teachers into line in the matter of pension abatement with civil servants and employees of local authorities including vocational teachers all of whom are covered by the Pensions Abatement Act of 1965. Under this amending paragraph abatement is limited to cases where a pensioned secondary teacher is re-employed in a secondary teaching service and does not re-enter membership of the superannuation scheme. Provision is made to enable the Minister to waive this limited abatement of he considers that persons with particular training and experience are required for the particular work and that it is not practicable to meet the requirement otherwise than by the re-employment of pensioners. The provision is effective from the 1st January, 1965, that is the same as in the case of the Pensions Abatement Act of 1965. The question of abatement of pension does not arise in the case of pensioned secondary teachers who are re-employed in a pensionable capacity in a secondary teaching service. In all such cases the teacher's pension ceases during the period of re-employment. Circumstances would have to be very exceptional, of course, before I would waive —when there is, I suppose, a scarcity of teachers in a particular subject if we could not get them for a certain specific period.
In regard to the points raised by Senator Sheehy Skeffington I cannot go into these measures. They are comparatively minor and specific matters ruled out of order by the Leas-Chathaoirleach. I cannot, therefore, go over the whole field. This is a question of pensions for widows and so forth. It is really a matter for the Government as a whole and it goes far beyond the scope of the Minister for Education. It is not a matter primarily for me.
Would the Minister extend some hope that he would take a favourable view of these two suggestions——
Hope springs eternal
My opinion would be purely academic. This matter was examined some time ago by the Minister for Finance. All public service employees are involved and I think some years ago a special committee reported on this matter. Naturally, everyone would like to see the lot of widows improved but there is the question of priorities and the question of finance and getting our priorities right. There is no point in Senator Sheehy Skeffington asking me what I think. I think a lot of things but that does not say they will happen. I might say I would scrap the Seanad and save a considerable amount of money and put such savings towards the widows. A lot of people would applaud me in that sentiment but it is purely a sentiment that would come from myself.
Would the Minister not agree that a contributory pension scheme would be largely a matter between the Department and the people concerned because it happened in the case of the Institute of Higher Education.
With the greatest respect and I am not passing the buck, I feel, as the Senator is aware, that there is another place to raise these matters globally. The Department of Education per se could not enter into such negotiations. Those should be brought up at the appropriate level and in the appropriate place.
Surely the Minister underestimates his persuasive powers?
Well, collective responsibility, if it gets that far. I am only a voice.
Tá mé buíoch don Seanadóir Ó Conalláin as ucht na fáilte a chur sé roimh an leasú seo. Fé mar adúirt sé, deineadh an cheist a phlé ag an Chomhairle Idiréitigh agus bhíothas go léir sásta leis na leasuithe a bhí á moladh. Bhí sé féin agus an Seanadóir Ó Brosnacháin ar aon aigne leis an Seanadóir Sheehy Skeffington faoi ceist na bpinsean poiblí. Sin é an scéal agus níl aon rud le rá agam ar an cheist seo.
I should like to welcome the suggestion from Senator Brosnahan for the rationalisation of the scheme. I am aware that the matter has been receiving the attention of my Department and I hope that it may be possible to make progress on the question in the future. I also thank him for his expression of appreciation in regard to the concession of public service pensioners made in the Budget recently.
Question put and agreed to.