I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Ossian Smyth, to the House.
Nithe i dtosach suíonna - Commencement Matters
Traveller Community
I thank the Minister of State for being here. I am standing here again today to raise an important issue around the energy relief that was promised to us all. As we know, the electricity costs emergency benefits scheme that was first promised to us all last year was for the sum of €200 in 2022. This has been extended to €600 over 2022 and early this year. However, many members of the Traveller community have still not received the full credit, or any credit at all, because of the type of accommodation they live in.
National Traveller MABS and I have sought clarity and action on these issues. We received a guarantee from the Minister that the situation would be addressed. However, National Traveller MABS is still hearing of members of the Traveller community who have not received any credit to date. We were given a guarantee from the Minister that the credit would no longer be taken from the Traveller accommodation fund, but we still heard of this happening late last year.
National Traveller MABS first wrote to the Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, last January looking for a meeting to get clarity, where the Department explained to us about the lack of individual meter point reference numbers, MPRNs, and the issue of doubling up.
We explained about Traveller accommodation, how many Travellers share one meter and how many Traveller families live in overcrowded accommodation. We asked the Minister how it would be rolled out and what the timeline would be. Unfortunately we never received answers to those questions.
Last year I met the Minister of State and he agreed that the credit would not come from Traveller funding and the Traveller community would be treated equally to people who are not living in official Traveller halting sites or Traveller accommodation. We thank the Minister of State for his time and commitment in this area. However, many members of the Traveller community are being left behind and have not received any credit. I will make a long speech short and get right to the questions.
The questions from National Traveller MABS and I are as follows. How will the scheme be rolled out to make sure that every Traveller household will receive a full energy credit? When will the households who missed out on a credit be issued the credit? What is the timeframe for this? What systems have been put in place to make sure that the credits are not being taken from the Traveller accommodation budget? I am aware that the credit that has been taken from the Traveller accommodation budget looks as if it will be reimbursed but how will that happen? National Traveller MABS has requested a meeting with the Minister of State, Deputy Ossian Smyth, or the Minister for Environment, Climate and Communications, Deputy Eamon Ryan. Can the Minister of State commit to that meeting today?
Again, I stand here talking about what is not being done for Travellers. However, it is very important to give credit where credit is due when we can, to the Sligo local authority which was very productive. It went to the Department of Environment, Climate and Communications to look for funding and received it. It put in meters for every Traveller family who was impacted and I would like to see more local authorities be as productive as the Sligo local authority. If the Minister of State could answer those three questions I would appreciate that.
Before I call the Minister of State I wish to welcome the students from Mitchelstown who are in the Gallery. They are very welcome and I hope they have a very productive and fruitful visit to the Houses of the Oireachtas. Tá cead fáílte mór roimh go léir.
I welcome the students from Mitchelstown. I am attending the House on behalf of the Minister for Environment, Climate and Communications, Deputy Eamon Ryan. I will read out the answer he provided for this but I will address those very specific questions Senator Flynn put in the follow-up.
The Government is acutely aware of the impact the recent increases in global energy prices are having on households. Throughout 2022 the Government introduced a €2.4 billion package of supports as part of budget 2023, and has introduced a package of one-off measures worth €2.5 billion. This includes a new electricity costs emergency benefit scheme through which €550.47 exclusive VAT is being credited to each domestic electricity account in three payments. The first payment has been made with the second due in the current January-February billing cycle, and the last and final payment in the March-April billing cycle. The estimated cost of this scheme for more than 2 million domestic electricity households is €1.211 billion. This is in addition to the first electricity costs benefit scheme in April, May and June 2022. Upon the scheme's conclusion on 30 June 2022 more than 2.1 million domestic electricity accounts had received the payment with the value of these payments totalling almost €377 million. This means that 99.36% of all eligible domestic electricity accounts had the credit applied.
The use of the meter point registration number, MPRN, as a unique identifier ensured a very broad reach and no application of means testing. The payment is applied to a domestic electricity account using the single identifier of the MPRN to ensure that it can be administered automatically and without an application. The advantage of the scheme is that it uses the MPRN to identify all domestic electricity accounts and to ensure that payments are made directly and automatically to those accounts without using means testing, application or approval.
Despite this advantage, the original scheme had limitations. As a result there are cohorts that did not receive the payment. One particular cohort, identified since the first scheme, includes a number of Traveller households who use local authority accommodation and who are unable to access the credit. In this situation the MPRN is registered to the local authority and it supplies multiple households. This group is identifiable through the use of local authority accommodation.
In approving the second electric costs emergency benefit scheme, the Government also approved funding for this group. This included provision for payment to be made to these households in respect of the first scheme. The Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications has worked with the County and City Management Association, CCMA, on this matter and has written to each local authority. It requested that the local authorities identify and confirm the number of eligible households on local authority sites. Funds were then provided to individual, eligible local authorities at the end of 2022 to enable them to make the necessary payments to these households in their areas. The allocation of these funds to Traveller households is a matter for each local authority. Any delay with the allocation of funds should be raised directly with the relevant local authority.
I thank the Minister of State for his reply. When this scheme was first rolled out, it did not include Traveller accommodation. That will have to be looked at going forward for other schemes. I welcome the fact that the Minister of State and the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications, Deputy Eamon Ryan, are committed to dealing with this issue. To the best of my knowledge, there are between 300 and 600 Traveller families that have not received a single cent of this electricity credit. That is unfair and unjust and there is really no explanation for it. I have been working with National Traveller MABS, which deals with people who are really on the margins of society, including Travellers who are living on the side of the road or in overcrowded accommodation. I thank the Minister of State for his answers. I will deliver the answers back to National Traveller MABS. I hope there is some way we can organise a meeting with MABS because they are the professionals in terms of how we can get the scheme rolled out.
There are 387 Traveller households affected by this issue. The amount of money transferred to the local authorities was €284,000 to be split between them. That is to cover not just the new three payments but also the original payment that families missed out on. The local authorities were told that they had to use the money and pay it directly to the Traveller families so it should not go into a Traveller accommodation fund.
I have met with the Senator before on this matter. In order to advance this I am happy to meet with her again. I am also happy to meet with National Traveller MABS again. I have been on a call with National Traveller MABS as well to discuss this. I think the Senator was seeking a meeting with the Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan. I do not know what happened in that regard but I am happy to meet the Senator and the civil servant in charge of administering the scheme to see if there is any problem.
We have now transferred the money to the county councils so if a county council is not giving the money it means there is a problem with the county council. I reiterate that I am not fobbing the Senator off. I am happy to call a chief executive on her behalf and I am happy to deal with a particular case. Sometimes the best thing to do is to follow down one case, to find out what the answer is and that is part of the problem. I will help the Senator in any way I can. If the Senator makes an appointment with me I will sit down with her and National Traveller MABS. We will work with one of the families that did not receive the payment and try to find out why.
It is National Traveller MABS that is doing all this work with the Traveller community.
Yes, it is National Traveller MABS that is doing all the work.
Rail Network
I am raising the issue of Crusheen railway station for a number of reasons. It was closed in 1976 but the infrastructure remains. It is not a big issue to reopen it. It should be reopened simply because the rail line between Limerick and Galway is now extremely successful. I take the train from Ennis to Dublin every week. I take it in both directions. I get it from Ennis to Limerick and on to Dublin. Sometimes I get it from Ennis to Athenry and on to Dublin. I return on a Thursday evening both ways again, regularly.
I have noticed in the last number of years, excluding the years of the pandemic, that the rail line between Limerick and Galway is extremely busy.
Many students who would have traditionally lived in Galway or Limerick now live in Ennis and commute to Galway or Limerick. Similarly, there are students in Limerick commuting to college in Galway and vice versa. Aside from students, there are young professionals with jobs in Limerick who live in Ennis or with jobs in Galway who live in Limerick or Sixmilebridge. It is an extremely busy commuter line.
About 15 years ago when the western rail corridor was opened, there was much criticism that it would not work or be viable. The facts and figures speak for themselves. On a Thursday evening, in particular, one can just about get standing room on the trains between Limerick and Galway.
The Crusheen railway station is about six or seven minutes on the rail line between Ennis and Galway. A number of housing estates have been built in Crusheen in recent years and there is potential for many more. People living in communities around Crusheen, such as Corofin, Ruan and other areas closer to Ennis, would be more inclined and attracted to using Crusheen railway station.
My question is simple. We are not talking about building a new railway station but recommissioning an old station. That would be of enormous benefit to the people of Crusheen and the surrounding areas, and to County Clare and the rural areas of Ennis. It would be a statement by the Government and Iarnród Éireann that they are committed to people living in places like Crusheen and commuting. It would provide people with an easy way of commuting. Many of these railways stations are unmanned and automatic. The station in Oranmore, I understand, is automatic. There is no reason the station in Crusheen could not be automatic.
While I am on the issue, I will raise something I have campaigned about for a long time, namely standardised fares. People travelling from Maynooth to Dublin get 30% cheaper fares than those commuting from Ennis to Limerick, even though it is around the same distance. I am sure the Minister of State is aware of the same experience in Mayo for people using public transport to commute. It is not just with the railways but also with buses. In County Clare, there are two providers under the TFI brand, Bus Éireann and Local Link Limerick Clare. They charge different prices for the exact same journey. We need standardised fares. It makes sense. It is ridiculous we do not have them.
In our overall review of transport policy, we need to look at opening railways stations where it makes sense to do so and the infrastructure is in place. We also need to look at standardised fares.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Seanadóir Conway as ucht an t-ábhar seo a ardú inniu.
I am taking this matter on behalf of the Minister for Transport, Deputy Eamon Ryan, who has responsibility for policy and overall funding of public transport, including rail. However, the operation, maintenance and renewal of the rail network and stations on it, including the station at Crusheen, is a matter for Iarnród Éireann in the first instance.
Programme for Government: Our Shared Future commits to a fundamental change in the nature of transport in Ireland. The Minister believes rail has a crucial role to play in achieving that change. It is vital we address constraints in the rail sector and deliver a network that allows rail to fulfil its potential in pursuit of decarbonisation and rural connectivity priorities and as a generator of prosperity for people across the island of Ireland. To that end, the Department of Transport has co-commissioned the all-island strategic rail review with the Northern Ireland Department for Infrastructure. The review is establishing the strategic context for investment in rail across the island in the coming decades. Work on the review is at a very advanced stage and a key consideration of the analysis is how the rail network can support regional and rural connectivity, as described by the Senator, encompassing service stopping patterns and the provision of stations.
The delivery of any new rail infrastructure involves a multi-agency approach in the planning, design, funding and construction of a scheme. To protect the taxpayer, there are also guidelines and requirements in place surrounding the release of funds for capital infrastructure projects, which must be adhered to by all agencies wishing to draw down public funds. These are set out under the public spending code drawn up by the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. Before Iarnród Éireann can receive public funding to proceed with any rail infrastructure scheme, the following conditions must be met. First, the proposal must align with transport and planning policy. Second, the proposal must have a robust business case in line with the public spending code, as well as the transport sector-specific appraisal guidelines. Third, a full demand assessment must be included as an input to the business case.
The Minister is not aware of any plans to reopen the station at Crusheen. However, as already noted, potential services and infrastructure along existing and potential new rail lines are being considered as part of the strategic rail review. Iarnród Éireann has advised that it will keep the case for a railway station at Crusheen under review in line with future demand trends, but at present there is no provision for a station with the current funding profile. I know the Senator raised the issue with Jim Meade, the CEO of Irish Rail, when he met the all-party group on rail last week, and I am sure it will be followed up from there.
I thank the Minister of State for his reply, the contents of which I note and am not 100% happy with. The Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, is talking about opening new rail links and lines the length and breadth of the country. He is even talking about opening a rail line between Ennis and Shannon, and between Shannon and Limerick. I welcome that and it is an excellent proposal. He is talking about utilising the rail link around Limerick city to create a light rail service. That would be welcome and I would support it. In this case, the infrastructure is in place, the property is owned and there is a structure in place. It would not cost a fortune and it would make a whole lot of sense, yet the Minister is telling us it is not being considered. This proposal should be considered much sooner than the opening of rail lines between Limerick and Shannon. It should be done first because, sadly and unfortunately, we all know we will wait a long time for a rail link between Limerick, Shannon and Ennis. This is something that could be done quickly. The people of County Clare, particularly in Crusheen and the surrounding communities, will be most disappointed with the Minister's response to this Commencement matter.
As I have outlined, operational issues such as the opening of stations are a matter for Iarnród Éireann, not the Minister for Transport. I have laid out the context of the all-island rail review, which is being finalised. I found from the cross-party meetings we had with Jim Meade last week that he was open to suggestions. I encourage Senator Conway to pursue the matter with him. As the Senator said, the success of the Limerick to Galway line, which was put in place by a former Minister, Deputy Ó Cuív, is a testament to the fact that when a service is provided, people use it.
Hear, hear.
Before we move on to the third Commencement matter, I welcome a group of councillors from Donegal who I am sure also have lots of thoughts on train lines. They are here for the exceedingly pressing issue of mica. I welcome Councillors Michael McBride, Kevin Bradley, Ian McGarvey, Pauric McGarvey and Niamh Kennedy. I extend a super warm welcome to my Labour Party colleague, Councillor Martin Farren. They are most welcome to the Chamber.
Employment Support Services
The Minister of State is welcome for my Commencement matter. I raise this matter because every Thursday morning, members of the Joint Committee on Disability Matters hear from people with disabilities and how barriers are erected that prevent them from taking part in everyday life. Employment opens a door to so many opportunities. It is about independence and people as individuals being able to articulate for themselves and have ambition.
I ask the Department to highlight the rationale for barring self-employed people with disabilities from availing of the Department's reasonable accommodation fund in order to support themselves in reaching their full potential and the full potential of their businesses.
We have 130,000 people with a disability, aged 15 and over, at work. That means only 22% of working-age people with disabilities are at work, the worst rate in Europe. The figure is very depressing. There is a fundamental flaw in how we go about providing workplace grants and reasonable accommodation grants. Workplace grants to assist people with a disability are attached to the employer not the employee, the person they are there to help. The employee is then tied to that employment. In no other workplace would the reasonable accommodation be at the liberty of the employer. It is ludicrous that self-employed disabled persons are barred from accessing the scheme and prevented from supporting themselves with reasonable workplace adaptations.
Last year, I wrote to the Department asking how much had been spent in recent years on reasonable accommodation grants in the workplace. The employee retention grant caught my eye. In 2019, 2020 and 2021, not 1 cent was drawn down. Only €111,000 in total was drawn down from the Department of Social Protection in grants. Although we have 130,000 persons with a disability at work, that is the amount that was provided to support them at work. It is no wonder we have the highest unemployment rate among people with disabilities. I want to know the rationale for this. To be honest, I am not going to get a satisfactory answer. Will the Minister of State, Deputy Calleary, impress on the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, the need for a shift in mindset in the Department and in its approach, which is not working? Only slightly more than €100,000 was drawn down in workplace grants in 2021 and not 1 cent was drawn down from the employment retention grant. That indicates there is something seriously wrong. We must associate the grants with the needs and wants of individuals.
Article 27 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, CRPD, recognises "the right of persons with disabilities to work, on an equal basis with others; this includes the right to the opportunity to gain a living by work freely chosen or accepted in a labour market and a work environment that is open... [and] inclusive" with a realisation of the right to work. We are not upholding Article 27 of the CRPD because we are not individualising the grants. We are preventing self-employed people who have the audacity to create their own business from daring to dream and to have ambition.
I hope the Minister of State can bring what I have said back to the Minister. I do not expect much from the Department's response because I have heard other answers from it. I urge the Minister of State to take this issue up with the Department.
Before I invite the Minister of State to respond, I welcome some potential future Senators and Deputies to the Gallery – students from St. Patrick's College, Lacken Cross, in County Mayo. They are more than welcome. We are delighted to have them join us for our session this afternoon.
Thank you, Acting Chair, for extending a welcome to the students from Lacken Cross. Some of the issues raised by Senator McGreehan were discussed by them some weeks ago.
I am responding to this matter on behalf of the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Humphreys. I thank the Senator not only for raising the issue but for doing so with such passion.
As the Senator is aware, the Department of Social Protection provides a wide range of disability income supports that are designed to support people with disabilities who wish to enter or return to self-employment. Disability allowance and the blind pension assist people to enter self-employment through the income disregard. The partial capacity benefit allows people on a disability social insurance payment to take up employment or self-employment.
These incentives allow people to earn and retain most or some of their social welfare benefits and secondary payments.
The reasonable accommodation fund is comprised of four grants. The four grants are the workplace equipment adaptation grant, the employee retention grant, the job interview interpreter grant and the personal reader grant. I could give the Senator the full answer but I will not waste her time because I want to focus on the employee retention grant scheme. I noted her comments about there being no drawdown in respect of that grant scheme, which is designed to assist employers to retain employees who acquire a disability. It is available to any employer, including the self-employed, with employees. The grant is designed to provide funding to identify accommodation and-or training needs to enable employees to remain within the company. On foot of the Senator's intervention, I intend to ask officials in my Department to ascertain from the Department of Social Protection why there has been no drawdown and what we can do as a Department with direct interaction with employers to promote the drawdown of the employee retention grant scheme.
As the Senator knows, the Department of Social Protection is currently finalising a review of the reasonable accommodation fund, which will be published in the coming months. The review is to see how to improve the effectiveness of the grant and to identify gaps in provision, as outlined by the Senator. It also aims to improve the application and payment processes. The review will be informed by an extensive public consultation, which took place last year. I encourage her to engage directly with the Minister and the Department on that review.
In budget 2023, an additional €1 million in funding was announced to expand the provisions made under the reasonable accommodation fund grant and to support the recommendations from the forthcoming review. I assure the Senator that the question of how to improve take-up and provide adequate support to self-employed disabled people is part of that review. Certainly, from the perspective of my Department, we will work with her to ensure there is greater awareness of the supports and a greater take-up of them.
I note from the Minister of State's response that the scheme is for self-employed people. I ask that it be more fully brought through to those self-employed people because I know of several with disabilities who are barred from that grant. I am grateful to him for bringing word on the employee retention scheme because if no one is drawing it down, there is something wrong. People do not know about it. It is a fantastic idea for upskilling, keeping people in work and making sure they are welcomed and encouraged into the workplace. I ask it to be far more visible on the Department's website that the scheme is for self-employed people and that the Department follows through on it.
There has been a slight changeover of the guard; more students from St. Patrick's College, Lacken Cross, County Mayo, are in the Gallery. I welcome them. I welcomed their fellow students a few moments ago. As I said, we hope there are a few future councillors, Senators and Deputies among those who are watching, learning and listening.
I again thank the Chair for the welcome she extended to Lacken Cross students.
I do not think the Senator and I disagree on any of the issues she outlined. I will bring this to the attention of officials in my Department and ask them to follow it up through the local enterprise office network. The work of the Senator and the Joint Committee on Disability Matters she sits on, chaired by Deputy Michael Moynihan, is exemplary and extraordinary. I am more than happy to ensure our Department is playing a full role in allowing people with a disability to be the leading-edge entrepreneurs many of them already are.
Public Sector Pensions
I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Noonan, to the House.
The Minister of State is very welcome to the House. He will be aware that I have spoken on issues relating to my electorate, county councillors, for many years.
I am delighted to see some of them present in the Public Gallery having travelled all the way from Donegal over the mica issue. It is something we have to take on board. It is not for the good of their health that these people travelled for three and a half hours to get down here and will spend the same amount of time travelling back home.
Today, however, I wish to raise the issue of the ambiguity that exists in the gratuity of county councillors. The situation is clear if a county councillor served as such from 2020 to 2023, 2024 or whenever the next election will be. Such councillors know exactly what are their entitlements. For councillors who served on both a town council and a county council, where a dual mandate was held, again, the situation is clear and they know exactly what are their entitlements. Their entitlements are four twentieths, or one fifth, of the representational payment. I have always had a difficulty with the title "representational payment" because, as the Minister of State will know, we have representational payments here in the Oireachtas and they are an entirely different thing from what is given to county councillors. It should be called a salary but that is an argument for another day.
The ambiguity arises where a member of a local authority was a member of a town council for ten years, let us say. We lost all the town councils in 2014. That is a decision the Minister of State might revise and reconsider because many towns are dying due to the lack of a town council. We have finished up in a situation where there is a lack of certainty in respect of the entitlement for a person who had a single mandate on a town council and subsequently went on to a county council and finished in 2024 or 2023. I want to put certainty in place and I hope the Minister of State can assist me in that regard.
First and foremost, there is ambiguity with regard to the representational payment. Is it the current one or the previous one? In the public service, we always deal with the current, so the gratuity should be based on the representational payment of €25,000-odd that is there today and there should be no ambiguity whatsoever in that regard. The issue of taxation is an individual one and I will not get into it. Those who were both a county or city councillor and a town councillor know they will be given the county councillor's rate of gratuity. It is the other group in which I am most interested, and I hope the Minister of State can shed light on that issue today.
As a former councillor who served both on a borough council, for ten years, and a county council, for 16 years, I agree with the sentiments expressed by the Senator in respect of the reinstatement of town councils. It is a matter for another day but they served a particular function, particularly in respect of the urban agenda, and would have a role in the context of the challenges local government is facing on climate and other issues. I agree with the Senator. It was a mistake to abolish them.
I thank the Senator for raising the issue of the councillor retirement gratuity. I appreciate the opportunity to address the House on the matter. Unlike Oireachtas Members, there is no provision for councillors to be part of the single public service pension scheme. The current arrangements for lump sum gratuity payments for retiring councillors, therefore, are unique. The terms of the gratuity payments to councillors are set out in the provisions of the Local Authority Members (Gratuity) Regulations 2002-06. As the gratuity is non-contributory, councillors incur no deductions from salary payments towards their gratuity lump sum. Any period of service as an elected member of a local authority from 4 May 2000 reckons as service for the purposes of the gratuity, subject to a maximum of 20 years' service.
The calculation of the gratuity is based upon the representational payment that was in place when the principal regulations were given effect in 2002. At that time, said payment was worth €11,000 per annum. Through the subsequent years, the representational payment has been adjusted in proportion to any adjustments made to the salary of a Senator. The annual accrual rate towards the gratuity lump sum is calculated as four twentieths of the adjusted representational payment for each year of service up to the maximum of 20 years' service. This provides for a maximum gratuity payment worth 400% of the adjusted representational payment after 20 years' service.
The adjusted representational payment is currently worth €18,790 and, therefore, the maximum gratuity lump sum is €75,160. This is due to be increased by 2% from 1 March 2023 to match an increase due to the Senator's salary from the same date as a result of the revised national pay agreement. The principal regulation provided that the gratuity becomes payable on retirement from local government service and having reached 50 years of age.
When a person ceases to be a counsellor before the age of 50, the gratuity will be preserved until the age of 50 and will be based on the amount of the adjusted representation payment on that date. A report of the independent review of the role and remuneration of elected members, overseen by Sarah Moorhead SC, was published in June 2020. The report set out a number of recommendations to reform and rebalance the financial supports for councillors away from expenses and allowances in favour of a more normal taxable salary to income.
On 18 May 2021, a Government decision approved a proposal on the reform of financial support for councillors that took account of the recommendations of the Moorhead report and subsequent feedback received from councillors and their representative bodies, as well as engagement with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. On 1 July 2021, new regulations were given effect to implement the Government's decision. This included the introduction of a new salary-type annual remuneration payment for councillors into any local authority employee timescale. The annual remuneration payment is currently worth €27,593 per annum and will increase by 2% from 1 March 2023 in line with the revised national pay agreement. The annual remuneration payment is not linked to the calculation of the gratuity as the Government's decision did not provide for, nor was there any increase to, the gratuity recommended in the Moorhead report.
My Department is engaging with council representative associations on the current terms of the gratuity payable to councillors, which I acknowledge is a matter of considerable interest to them. I understand an analysis of councillors' views and needs in this regard has been undertaken by the AILG, which will be of assistance to the Department when completed. Any adjustment in the existing terms of the gratuity will require new regulations to be made with the consent of my colleague, the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform.
I came in here with some degree of hope. I am going out more depressed than I came in. We are creating a dangerous precedent. The public service has always been based on the fact that when staff come to retire, they get a lump sum based on current salary. I am mindful of my career, where I started work as a private soldier and will finish on the single pension scheme as a teacher. At the end of the day, my entitlement to a pension will not be directly differentiated from that of any other member of the public service. Provided I was three years in the job, I will get the lump sum and pension of a teacher.
When we allow chinks like this to take place, whereby a representational payment can be based on €18,000, it is a dangerous precedent and one that could find its way filtering through to other sectors of the public service. We have to remember that it is not just county councillors who do not make a contribution to their pension. Many roles make no contribution; it is part and parcel of their salary.
We have to sit down and look at this. Sadly, in the case of PRSI, along with five county councillors, I had to take a court case to get the PRSI class K removed from county councillors and get them moved to class F. We were not generous enough to make that retrospective. This is an important issue.
From the point of view of our local authority members, I do not know why anybody would go into the role anymore. We are stripping powers from them and will not treat them in the same way as other public servants when it comes to their representational payment. I appreciate this is not the doing of the Minister of State, but he has it within his remit to make moves to try to fix this and treat these people in a decent way.
I am happy to see that there is no differentiation between town and county councillors. I assume all councillors will retire on the same level of representational payment.
I thank the Senator for his continued advocacy for the rights of councillors. I welcome the engagement between the AILG and my Department. The Minister of State, Deputy O'Donnell's, predecessor, Deputy Peter Burke, moved swiftly to implement the Moorhead report once a Government was formed.
That was welcomed across the elected members. The role of elected members is critically important, especially at local level. This is not to say powers have been stripped. We are putting in additional layers of responsibilities with our local authority members in the areas of climate, biodiversity and urban development. This is a whole new set of tasks and challenges that local governments are facing. We want to see robust local government. We want to see elected members being valued in their communities and to ensure their remuneration and gratuity upon retirement is reflective of the incredible work they do for local communities.
I welcome the visitors to the Public Gallery.
Cuireadh an Seanad ar fionraí ag 3.15 p.m. agus cuireadh tús leis arís ag 3.30 p.m.
Sitting suspended at 3.15 p.m. and resumed at 3.30 p.m.