Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

That is not the rationale. The Minister's explanation underlies the folly of taking a piecemeal approach to pension reform. It is regrettable that this issue has not been addressed in a comprehensive and meaningful way. As I stated previously, it is a case of passing the parcel between social protection and finance on this. One cannot make changes in one area without them having a knock-on effect in other areas. The type of arguments being put forward by the Minister, such as the danger of companies closing schemes and so on, is reminiscent of the arguments made against attempts to tax capital, namely, that it would flee the country. Employers have responsibilities to their employees. The State should be insisting that they honour those responsibilities. If that needs underpinning in legislation that is what should be done. The type of open situation that currently exists should not be allowed to continue.

The Minister speaks about this as if it is some kind of grace and favour arrangement with employers. Their failure to address a deficit in a scheme and the Government allowing them to walk away means that the risk is spread not between the employers and employees but with the remainder of the tax paying population. Essentially, the Minister is allowing employers, even though they may have current or future the capacity to meet that deficit, to walk away from their responsibilities, if only moral responsibilities given the lack of statutory underpinning in this regard, leaving everybody else to pick up the tab. That is an indefensible position to adopt. It is regrettable that the Minister has not grasped this nettled and dealt with the problem.

With regard to the overall proposals in this legislation, I am surprised that the overall benefit is not being capped. The notional figure of €60,000 is being used by Revenue in terms of what is regarded as a reasonable, and in many ways very generous, pension that would be subsidised by the State. I cannot understand why this is not being capped in the context of this legislation, which again would help to spread the risk more evenly. The Minister spoke about spreading the risk. While that is what is being done employers are not being included in this regard.