Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for facilitating this Topical Issues debate.

People who have worked hard all their lives deserve an opportunity to live their retirement years with dignity and financial independence.

For many, however, the dream of a secure retirement has slipped away. The recession has taken its toll on many retirement funds. Millions of euro were wiped off pension funds and people approaching retirement are really worried as several pension schemes are in deficit. Furthermore, a significant number in the workforce are not in any pension scheme at all. The FÁS community supervisors and assistant supervisors fall in to this category and that is the reason for my raising this matter. In July 2008, the Labour Court recommended that an agreed pension scheme be introduced for community supervisors and assistant supervisors employed on FÁS community employment, CE, schemes. There are currently 1,143 CE schemes in the country. They are an integral part of our communities and they are providing a lifeline for the participants, who are gaining valuable experience. They are sponsored by voluntary and community groups but their day-to-day management is the role of the supervisors and assistant supervisors who are employed on a 39-hour-week basis.

An integral part of the success of CE schemes has been the fact that they have been run by a dedicated group of supervisors for whom the position is much more than a job. I recently met a number of such dedicated supervisors in my constituency. I met them in the evening when they had finished work, and they expressed their concerns. Their duties range from preparing and implementing training programmes for participants and planning the day to the running of the schemes. They comprise a self-motivated group and work hard. They are devoted to their jobs and go above and beyond the call of duty to ensure participants derive the maximum benefit from their participation on the schemes. They are experienced in people management. They have a very good understanding of business operations, including finance, and many hold a relevant third level qualification or equivalent qualifications.

Ultimately, however, there is no recognition for their years of loyal and dedicated service to their work because, when they reach the statutory age for retirement - 65 years, for example - they are not entitled to a pension. I refer to a dedicated group of people who have devoted their careers to their communities. Some have amassed 20 years' service. Unfortunately, the circumstances I describe seem to obtain regarding many workers in the country since there are in the region of 900,000 people who have no provision for a pension other than the State old age pension. From 1 January 2014, the age of entitlement for the State pension will rise to 66 years. It will increase again to 67 years in 2021 and to 68 years by 2028. The supervisors are worried about how they are going to fund the gap from their retirement until they receive the State pension.

I understand that negotiations had been entered into by the unions representing CE supervisors, but they have not yielded any positive results for the workers. They are caught between a rock and a hard place. Although they are paid by FÁS, I understand they are direct employees of their sponsoring organisations. It is quite clear that their sponsoring organisations are not in a position to pick up the tab for their pensions given that they are community-based organisations that rely on voluntary contributions themselves to subsidise the schemes.

The Minister is not present, unfortunately, but I acknowledge she is anxious that people, particularly older people, would have a safe and secure retirement. She has engaged the OECD to undertake a review of our pensions policy. Now that the report has been finalised, when can we expect to hear the proposals on the long-term plan? Will the Minister include considerations in her proposals in regard to the dilemma facing CE supervisors and communicate with the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform to encourage his Department to re-engage the unions?

See this speech in context