Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Mine are more comments in response to what has been said than questions. Regarding Mr. Murray's remarks on section 2, he will be aware that, in a restructuring situation, the pensioners have no say. Consistent representations have been made to us about the unfairness of that. We are trying to give them a say. The wording might need some amendment. Mr. Murray mentioned detailed rules, notices, etc. I would envisage all of those matters being dealt with by way of regulation.

I take the point about the possibility of deferred pensioners being scattered all over the world. We have an election in a couple of weeks' time and some people might not be available to vote, but the result will come from those who do vote.

Mr. Donohoe's statement echoes the submissions that IBEC has already made on this issue. I understand his points. Of course there is no legal compulsion to provide for workers who have retired by way of a defined benefit scheme. By definition, an employer who opts to have a defined benefit scheme will be at a competitive disadvantage compared with an employer who has no scheme at all or a defined contribution scheme. We are trying to address the fact that solvent employers, which can afford to continue their contributions to defined benefit pension schemes, can walk away without let or hindrance. Employees join firms on the basis of a signed contract, a salary, a defined benefit scheme, the employer paying into that scheme, etc. Suddenly, the whole thing can be terminated at the sole discretion of the employer. That is unfair. If it was not unfair or something that needed to be dealt with, there would not be legislation such as that in the United Kingdom. As the Chairman stated, not only have previous witnesses supported the Bill, but they have urged us to get on with this as quickly as possible.

I take Mr. Donohoe's point about solvency and a risk to the balance sheet. I have tried to draft the Bill in such a way that solvency would be protected. For example, it could be spun out over a period of time. It may be that further adjustment is required. As Mr. Donohoe knows, we are providing for an ultimate appeal to the High Court. Perhaps it is in the High Court that the overall threat to solvency of applying the legislation in a particular case could be considered.

Regarding the risk to the balance sheet, if an employer has a defined benefit pension scheme, does it not have to provide for that on the balance sheet anyway? It is a contingent liability.