Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 2 April 2014
1. Deputy Timmy Dooley asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport if he will provide an update on the expert review of the Irish airlines superannuation scheme dispute; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15169/14]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport does not need me to tell him about the seriousness of the situation at our State airports in regard to the superannuation scheme, the impact it is having on workers' morale or the potential impact of an unresolved dispute on our tourism industry. A flash point was reached recently which saw Aer Lingus and other airlines making alternative arrangements in the context of a potentially significant impact on our tourism product and the image of our country. It is incumbent on all of us that the issue be resolved without delay. I ask the Minister to outline the current status of the process of establishing a committee to investigate the issue.
The expert panel was appointed on 3 March following consultations between my Department and the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation with IBEC and ICTU. The panel was asked to carry out an investigation into how a final resolution of the industrial relations issues with the IAS scheme can be secured. Last Monday, the panel made a preliminary report to the two Departments, IBEC and ICTU. The panel also issued a statement summarising the progress of its work to date.
The panel has held a series of meetings with all the relevant parties including the DAA, Shannon Airport, Aer Lingus, the trade unions and representatives of deferred members and pensioners. Through these meetings, it has identified a number of critical issues that it believes should now be jointly explored to deepen its understanding of the scope for progress among the parties. Intensive discussions on these issues are already under way and the panel will report back by 14 April. It is important these discussions and deliberations be allowed proceed over the coming weeks without interference so that a resolution can be found to this long-standing and complex issue.
As Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, I have no formal function in the resolution of the funding difficulties of the IAS scheme. This is primarily a matter for the trustees, the members of the scheme, the companies participating in the scheme and the regulator of such pension schemes, namely, the Pensions Board. The purpose of the expert panel is to identify the critical issues and facilitate the parties in finding a solution. In circumstances where this work is still under way, the threat of industrial or legal action between the parties is not helpful. I hope that all the parties involved will put all their efforts into engaging with the expert panel in order to find the most feasible and equitable solution to this matter in a timely manner. This would be in the best interests of all parties.
I welcomed the appointment of the independent review panel and I broadly support the approach that the Minister is taking. He has indicated that the panel is next due to report on 14 April. Does he expect it to issue a conclusive report at that stage? Will it have the capacity to reach a binding agreement or solution and, if not, what machinery of State will he use to bring about an appropriate resolution? I accept that he does not control the scheme but he has indicated in the past that if he had control of it he would have solved the problem a long time ago. Perhaps he will outline to the House the solution he has to bring the issue to a speedy conclusion in light of the considerable trepidation in the tourism sector and among workers and pensioners, who are deeply concerned about their future.
There is a potential to resolve the problem in the pension scheme. A significant deficit has arisen over the years because the company and former staff did not put enough into the scheme to match the benefits that were expected or promised. Deficits that accrued in similar schemes in the private sector and semi-State sector have been resolved by companies investing more money and beneficiaries accepting reduced benefits. The current problem arises because the deficit is so big that what is being asked from the company, staff and former staff is also very big. That is the space in which the solution has to be found, however. The expert panel is due to report to us on 14 April. The parties are currently quite far apart. The expert panel can make recommendations but it cannot impose them. What will be required after that will be decisions by the trustees and, probably, ballots by the existing workers if not also by other members of the scheme. As there is a soft deadline of June because of pension rules and regulations, the issue will need to be resolved by then and, of course, there is a risk of industrial action in the meantime.
I agree that the issue needs to be resolved but the Minister is not a hurler on the ditch who has handed the entire responsibility for the matter to the trustees. As one of the biggest shareholders in Aer Lingus and the sole shareholder in DAA, he is a significant actor in this game. I urge him to engage to the fullest extent to ensure the State is prepared to man up to its responsibilities. He stated that the pension fund has not been adequately resourced over the years and suggested that was an issues for the funders, one of which is the State. He has a responsibility to the workers who took pay cuts and accepted pay restraints in the expectation that when they reached pension age they would receive an appropriate level of benefits. Unfortunately, it is now clear to many of them that their working lives have not provided them with the capacity to retire in the manner they expected. The State shares a responsibility in this regard. Given that the Minister is at the coalface on this issue, I urge him to provide the appropriate level of funding to meet the State's responsibility.
I am certainly not a hurler on the ditch or a bystander.
I have worked with others to establish an expert panel to try to find a solution, but I cannot dictate a solution. I am a player, but I am not in charge.
The Deputy is right. I feel we have a responsibility to the workers to ensure they get some security in regard to their pensions. However, I also have a responsibility to taxpayers. It must be borne in mind that the Aer Lingus stake belongs to the 4.5 million citizens of this State, as does the stake in the airports. I cannot stand over a situation whereby Aer Lingus, the DAA and Shannon are devalued or put in a precarious financial position in order to secure benefits for a few thousand people at the expense of 4.5 million citizens. I must have regard to my responsibilities to everyone in the State, all the taxpayers and citizens, not just one group of employees or former employees.
