Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

On the cost of doing business, I know Deputy Butler has raised this issue. The rising cost of business crops up frequently when I meet business people. Obviously costs are passed on to customers and insurance is a significant cost. The approach we took with car insurance and health insurance has largely worked. The cost of health insurance stabilised following a significant increase and is starting to fall again. The same applies to car insurance. The Minister of State, Deputy Michael D'Arcy, is heading up the group that is trying to take a similar approach to public liability insurance and insurance for businesses. Using the same approach, we can get good results.

I have not seen the report on community banking yet, although I know it is pending. I cannot give an insight into the report as I have not seen it. We have heard all of the pros but not all the cons yet. I look forward to seeing the report as soon as possible. Community banking is an attractive model but, not having seen the report, I would not like to comment on it too much.

On commuter delays, I explained this morning that I did not travel in the direction we discussed but traffic was definitely heavy. Accidents sometimes have an impact on the entire city. Deputy O'Dowd is correct that if we dealt with accidents and collisions more quickly we would relieve congestion. Delays are often the result of rubbernecking, which is not to diminish the seriousness of some accidents. Often, when one has sat in traffic for a long time, one suddenly realises that the delay has been caused by people slowing down to take a look and see what was going on. I wonder if there are examples in other countries of how to remove the distraction more quickly to avoid congestion.

In terms of the bigger picture, investment in public transport will be necessary, in the cities in any case. There is no room for more roads and more roads would just mean more cars. What is required is a combination of better planning, higher density developments near public transport and major investment in public transport. Without the economic crisis, we would have been much further along with Transport 2021. We have revived half of the programme and we can get complete that in the period ahead.

Defined benefit pensions are a difficult issue. I do not believe there are any new defined benefit pension schemes, most of which were introduced in the 1960s and 1970s when assumptions made about retirement, life expectancy and work were different. Generally, in the 1960s and 1970s, people had one employer for their entire life. Even as recently as the 1970s, life expectancy was 68 years for men 72 years for women. All of these defined benefit schemes were largely built on the premise that members would work for the same company for 30 or 40 years and would be retired for two, three or four years. This false premise is fundamentally at the heart of the problem with defined benefit pension schemes. As those assumptions were wrong, not enough was paid in down the years either by the employer or the employees. This has given rise to a large deficit in a many pension funds, although I am aware that some are still in surplus and well funded.

We are struggling with the legislation at the moment and we have had drafts. We are trying to change the law to make it much harder for companies or employers to suddenly and unilaterally act by deciding to close down a pension fund. That includes trustees having to give greater notice to employees and members that they intend making changes to the pension fund, and also giving enhanced powers to the Pensions Authority to intervene and settle disputes. We are struggling with the whole concept of a debt on an employer, under which an obligation to close the gap would be imposed on the employer. While that could be of benefit to people who are about to retire, it could have serious consequences for people who are in their 30s, 40s and 50s and still working for the company in question because some companies would be crippled if they were required to close this gap. Some would close and, as a consequence, people would lose their jobs. Others would have such a large debt added to their balance sheet that they would have to abandon their plans for expansion or development. They would be totally hobbled in their activities and would no longer be able to compete against their competitors. Striking the right balance is proving to be a struggle. While we want to ensure people's pensions are protected, we do not want to do so at the expense of doing what has happened so often in the past when the ladder was pulled up on those who were not just about to retire. They could lose their jobs, their employers could go bust or the companies could be unable to invest further because their balance sheet would be destroyed. We are struggling to strike the right balance.