Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 20 Nov 1996

Vol. 471 No. 7

Written Answers. - Civil Service Pensions.

Seamus Brennan

Ceist:

118 Mr. S. Brennan asked the Minister for Finance if he will review the process following an award given by arbitration to a widow of a civil servant (details supplied) in County Dublin following the death in service of her husband in July 1973; whether at the time of the death, the automatic payment of injury grant to a widow had been increased by the Civil Service conciliation and arbitration scheme from one-third of a salary to one-half of a salary, with effect from June 1973, and that the widow was therefore entitled to one-half of the salary; whether, in view of the fact that her late husband was a voluntary contributor to the Civil Service Widows' and Orphans' Pension Fund, as introduced in July 1968, she became entitled to an additional one-quarter of the salary; the reason the person concerned has been receiving a reduced pension of seven-twelfths rather than the nine-twelfths she believes she is entitled to, due to the fact that agreed arbitration scheme recommendations cannot be rescinded by his Department; if he will accept the widow's claim that the settlement offered and accepted on 30 March 1987 was not in strict accordance with the regulations and that her signed acceptance of it was done under duress; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21593/96]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Quinn)

As stated in my reply to a similar parliamentary question in relation to this case tabled by the Deputy in May of last year, I understand that the case referred to by the Deputy was reviewed by my Department in 1987 in consultation with a prominent firm of solicitors, acting on behalf of the person concerned. As a result of this review, the matter was resolved on the basis of a full and final settlement which was accepted by all parties. The person concerned indicated in writing on 30 March 1987 that she was prepared to accept the agreed terms in full and final settlement of her claim for additional benefits under the superannuation Acts.

The settlement terms provided for a payment amounting to seven twelfths of salary, which is equal to what the person would have got if she had been awarded both the injury warrant pension and the pension under the Civil Service widows' and orphans' (contributory) pension scheme at the rates which actually applied before 1978. It is not the case that, at the time of the unfortunate death of the civil servant referred to by the Deputy, the rate of injury warrant widow's pension had been increased from one third to one half of salary. In fact, this change was implemented by way of statutory instrument in 1978, with retrospective effect to 1 June 1973. It was explicitly provided, both in the relevant agreement under the conciliation and arbitration scheme and in the relevant statutory instrument implementing this change, that a widow could not avail of both the injury grant payment and payment under the widow and orphans — now referred to as the spouses and childrens — scheme. Under the terms of this statutory instrument, the most that the widow concerned could receive would be 50 per cent of salary. Therefore, the settlement reached with the person concerned is more advantageous and certainly does not amount to a unilateral rescinding of the 1978 agreement by my Department.

Finally, as to the claim that the 1987 settlement was reached under duress, I should point out that the matter had been the subject of exhaustive correspondence over the years and at the time of the settlement the claimant's solicitors thanked the Department officials concerned for "the very helpful and sympathetic manner in which... [they] dealt with this claim".