Trevor Ó Clochartaigh (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Go raibh míle maith agat. I thank the Minister for addressing the questions. The actuarial review conducted by KPMG and published last year assessed the impact of the changes for the year 2020. It appears from our analysis that more pensioners will be brought into the net as people live well into their 80s, according to the statistics. However, the net value of the pension to each person will be lower. In effect, there will be more pensioners but each will be entitled to less money. The review demonstrates that following the changes, just 60% of individuals retiring in 2020 will receive a State pension of more than 80% of the full rate and 40% will receive less than that. That is a change of 20 percentage points from the proportion of people entitled to 80% or more who retire prior to the changes taking full effect. Does the Minister agree on the potential danger of creating a poverty trap in the future in that more pensioners will receive a pension but when the payment is compared with the average industrial wage, the percentage people will get into their hand will be lower in real terms?. That has the potential to create a poverty trap.

Governments have spent billions on tax reliefs on private pensions. Does the Minister agree that this policy needs to be readdressed?

Perhaps she will comment on the approach that the Government intends to take on tax reliefs for private pensions.

I shall comment on another area. The Minister has been judicious in her quotations from the OECD report or her reading of same. She said that the OECD endorsed the policy of the Government. It is more correct to say that the OECD said that it was an improvement on what existed previously and that it made a number of recommendations. One of its recommendations was that the State contributory and non-contributory pensions be rolled into one basic pension, either a universal pension based on residence or a safety net pension based on means. What is the Minister's view of the OECD's recommendation? Has the Department been asked to begin its research into the mechanics of introducing a universal pension, as suggested in the report?

My next comment might be a little off the mark. Last week we had a number of ESB workers in attendance and they brought the crisis in their pension fund to our attention. They said that there is a danger that the active members of the fund would be left with just 3% of their benefit entitlements if the scheme was wound up. They also stated that 80% of the pension scheme's members commenced work pre-1995 so have no entitlement to the State's contributory pension. Is there any action the Minister can take to protect the workers? They will be in an awkward situation having paid into a pension scheme that is going belly up and ineligible for a State pension scheme.