Paul Gavan (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the contributors and echo what others have said regarding the real value of this report on so many levels. It is a tremendous contribution to this debate on pensions and how we plan for the future. I will home in on the issue of the retirement age. I will declare an interest in that I have a trade union background and have worked with workers in meat factories, on construction sites and in retail. I agree with Mr. Duggan that we have to be realistic. How realistic is it to expect these workers to work until the age of 68 after a lifetime of working, bearing in mind that many of them will not have spent their entire working lives in Ireland? Many will have come in as foreign workers over the past 30 years or so. Many others, including me, will have spent a long time abroad because of our unfortunate tradition of emigration over decades. How realistic is it to expect these people, who have given a lifetime of work, to work on to the age of 68?

I again compliment the work done by the commission. I am intrigued by the four potential packages it presented. I prefer package 3 to package 4, because it does not force workers to work on to the age of 68. We all support the idea of flexible working, which is a key requirement. I am curious as to why package 3 was not chosen. I am looking at the potential increases in employer and employee PRSI. I see employee PRSI would go up by 0.2% under package 3, as opposed to no increase under package 4. The difference is between a 1.55% increase and a 1.35% increase. How do these PRSI rates compare with those of our European counterparts? My understanding is there is a significant gap between the PRSI paid by employers here and what is typically paid in Europe.