I want to raise certain matters which were raised on this Estimate previously. The question of superannuation and retired allowances has recently been considered here in connection with a motion. The Minister for Finance has special responsibility in regard to this, and generally the question of pensions and retired allowances is dealt with at Budget time by means of a Pensions (Increase) Bill or an award in respect of certain social welfare recipients, where increases are granted. Invariably, these increases are on a percentage basis and, while that particular method of dealing with the matter may seem as fair and reasonable as any other, there is a special case for consideration in respect of retired State personnel who have retired for some years and who find that their pensions fall substantially behind the pensions payable to their successors— who have filled the same positions but merely retired at a later date—and, consequently upon wage and salary adjustments, find that although they filled exactly the same position as a person who retired some months or, the case may be, years earlier—because of their later date of retirement—the pension is much higher. That particular type of case has resulted in respect of those who retired earlier. Retired State pensioners, who have retired for some time from the Army, the Garda or the Civil Service, find that their position is substantially worse than that of their successors who retired at a later date.
In common with other Deputies I have repeatedly expressed the view that the old method of awarding pensions based on the salary or wage on retirement may have been satisfactory enough when the value of money was relatively constant and fluctuations in the cost of living were infrequent. That situation no longer obtains. The position for many pensioners now is that the longer a person is retired the worse his or her position is compared with that of their successors who retired at a later date. While the method of granting pension increases on a percentage basis may appear to be reasonable enough, in fact some graded system and some more equitable system should be considered.
This question was considered some time ago by the inter-departmental Committee and a recommendation was made in that report, that pension increases should operate on some form of automatic adjustment procedure, comparable with that which operates in respect of serving personnel in regard to wage and salary matters. This question has been considered in other countries, of course, and varying methods and different approaches have been operated in respect to it. However, I think there is a tendency in a number of countries in recent times to deal with the circumstances of State pensioners in what can be regarded only as a more reasonable manner.
The hardship involved for many of those people is quite considerable. Some of them may be fortunate enough to have relatives on whom they can depend for some assistance. That imposes a burden on the relatives but, over and above that, many of them have no sons or daughters or other persons on whom they can depend because they have commitments of their own which make it quite impossible for them, and far beyond their resources, to make any contribution towards their retired parent or parents. I should like to direct the Minister's attention to the very serious problem which the rise in the cost of living has created for many categories of pensioners. The Minister should examine this question as sympathetically as possible.
There is another aspect which applies in a few cases. Despite the terms of the legislation which was passed, it is a fact that certain State pensioners still find that their pensions are abated. It was understood here when that amending legislation was brought in, that it would cover State pensioners who were so affected. Either because of a deliberate decision—and the numbers involved would hardly make it worthwhile—or because the pension schemes were so framed that certain people were still caught, some pension schemes were not amended to comply with the terms of the legislation.
This question affects certain individual Ministers, and particularly categories of pensioners under their responsibility. In the main, the reason put forward by these Ministers and Departments is that any amendment of the scheme which would relieve the abatement provision would have to have the assent of the Minister for Finance. This applies in the main to ex-Army personnel. There may be certain ex-Garda and other people who are affected also, but the cases which were brought to my attention apply to ex-Army personnel. I should like the Minister to examine these cases to see if the schemes can be altered. It does not seem that a great deal is involved, but to the individuals concerned, it is a matter of some significance.
