Vol. 442 No. 4
8 Mrs. T. Ahearn asked the Minister for Defence if he will make it mandatory for all members of the Permanent Defence Force, irrespective of rank, to have the permission of their spouse before taking a decision to opt out of the pension scheme.
17 Mr. Creed asked the Minister for Defence the number of widows of members of the Permanent Defence Force, whose husbands died or retired after the year 1978, who are not in receipt of any pension; the proposals, if any, he has to enable these women to receive a pension; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
20 Ms F. Fitzgerald asked the Minister for Defence the number of widows of members of the Permanent Defence Force, whose husbands died or retired after the year 1978, who are not in receipt of any pension; the proposals, if any, he has to enable these women to receive a pension.
27 Mr. Barry asked the Minister for Defence if he will make it mandatory for all members of the Permanent Defence Force, irrespective of rank, to have the permission of their spouse before taking a decision to opt out of the pension scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos 8, 17, 20 and 27 together.
I can sympathise with the views expressed in these questions. On a number of occasions I have met widow's organisations to consider the position of widows who have suffered as a result of the actions taken by their husbands. Provision for the payment of pensions to the widows and children of deceased soldiers was first made in 1978 when a contributory pensions scheme for such dependants was introduced. Soldiers serving at the time were included as members of the scheme unless they made a positive option in writing not to become members. A second opportunity to make provision for their dependants was granted in 1985 when all soldiers who had opted out of the scheme in 1978 were invited to reconsider their decisions and to join the scheme.
The number of widows whose husbands chose not to become members and who are outside the ambit of the scheme, is currently estimated at 180. I am having the position of these widows who find themselves disadvantaged because their husbands made this decision without consulting them reviewed to see if any concession is possible.
Membership of the contributory spouses' and children's pension scheme is compulsory in the case of all officers appointed since January 1971 and all soldiers enlisted since February 1978. The spouses and children of such personnel would qualify for pensions in the event of their husbands pre-deceasing them.
I am glad the Minister shares my concern and sympathy for these widows who, unfortunately, because their husbands decided to opt out of the pension scheme, are not in receipt of any pension from the Department of Defence. While it is welcome that the Minister is having the position of these widows reviewed I have a file in front of me which contains correspondence dating back to 1990 addressed to his predecessors. I will depend on the Minister to provide these widows with some consolation. Will the Minister consider providing an ex gratia payment given that the number of widows involved is only 180? I understand that provision was made for such a payment when the pension scheme was introduced. In the question I asked the Minister if he would make it mandatory for all members of the Defence Forces to inform their spouses. I understand from the responses I have received from the Department that almost 2,000 Army personnel currently serving have opted out of the scheme. What steps is the Minister going to take to rectify this?
The question is over-long.
It is very important.
Like all other questions.
We are aware of the devastating effects such a decision can have on families. What steps is the Minister going to take to encourage those 2,000 Army personnel to join the scheme?
It is estimated that of a strength of some 13,100 enlisted personnel in 1978 about 7,700 opted out of membership of the contributory scheme. A total of 1,850 soldiers who are currently serving are not members of the scheme. On the question of an ex gratia payment, the scheme applies to personnel who died either in service with not less than five years service or who retired on pension prior to 1 June 1977 and who were not afforded the opportunity to join the contributory scheme. The benefits under the ex gratia scheme are the same as those available under the contributory scheme. Initially, the ex gratia benefits were half the contributory rates but over the years they were raised to achieve parity. On the question of whether it should be made mandatory for Army personnel to inform their wives, I am not certain that this could be done or that it would be a good practice. I would have thought that people would do this in the ordinary way. I am not certain that legislation would be of help.
I advise the House that ordinary questions to the Minister for the Marine are due to commence at 3.27 p.m. in accordance with Standing Orders.
I disagree with the Minister on the question of whether it should be made mandatory for Army personnel to inform their spouses about this decision. If we are serious about protecting widows we will have to show courage and take this step. It is not too much to ask members of the Defence Forces to obtain the signature of their spouses before they opt out of the pension scheme. As this decision will affect spouses it should be taken by both partners. I ask the Minister to seriously consider making it mandatory for Army personnel to inform their spouses given that it is the only way we can protect them.
This is tending towards debate.
Can the Minister give us an assurance that he will be able to accommodate in the near future widows who have been affected by the decision of Army personnel to opt out of the scheme?
I do not want to be frivolous in dealing with what is a very serious subject but I cannot predict what may happen in the future. I would like to think that the problem will be resolved during my term of office as Minister for Defence. I do not want to indicate a time limit as I would only be misleading the Deputy and the House.
As I am sure the Minister is aware from discussions at the Cabinet table, under the most recent family law legislation the courts will be able to make provision for pension entitlements. If the opt out clause remains will it allow certain people to attempt to get around the regulations if the court directs that their pension be included in any family settlement? Is that not a reason for considering the suggestion made by my colleague?
That matter could be addressed in the review. I have no doubt that the review will be alert to this question and note the views expressed by the Deputies.
