Brendan Ryan (Dublin North, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I welcome Mr. Begg's appointment to the role. He is a great candidate and eminently suitable, as he has demonstrated in his presentation. I particularly welcome somebody from a trade union background because many members of pension schemes come from such a background. Mr. Begg has a lot of experience to bring and a deep insight. Most trade unionists to whom I have spoken in the past week certainly welcome his appointment. I look forward to his input in this very important role in the years ahead.

I wish to raise several issues about the IASS, deferred members and Deputy Clare Daly's point about people having a legitimate expectation of what they might stand to gain on retirement. Mr. Begg referred to an anomaly in the scheme. I have argued that while some called it an anomaly, what it amounted to was the company exploiting the rules of the scheme to use it as a slush fund and encouraging people to leave on the basis of unco-ordination to achieve the productivity it was seeking to achieve. It benefited from this anomaly, or what I argue were the rules of the scheme. The trustees ought to have been aware of this, but they seem to have been asleep on the job. What are Mr. Begg's general thoughts on this, with reference to what ought to happen in the future in such cases?

I also have a general point to make about the various categories of membership of the scheme. There were active members, deferred members and retired members. We meet them more often then we did in recent years. I have met many of them and members in all categories are disappointed. Active members are dissatisfied with the value transferred from the old scheme. Retired members have lost 10%, while deferred members have lost 50% to 60%. They are seeking to be treated in the same way as retired members, as they had been previously. In Mr. Begg's view, was there any possible outcome which could have led to greater satisfaction throughout all of the groups?