Marc Ó Cathasaigh (Waterford, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Given where I am in regard to this discussion and the more general discussion, I will be synopsising in asking my questions and the witnesses can come back to me on this. The central themes in the presentation seem to be around the age limits and the income limits, which were addressed first, and then, by inference, the gender implications because it is suggested it will predominately be women who will be engaged in that part-time work or below that income level.

The CPA issue is interesting because we have heard a range of evidence to suggest that the CPA as envisaged in the general scheme is far larger than was envisaged in the straw man, in terms of Revenue having a potential role with regard to gathering contributions and then the role of the CPA in managing the investment. It seems there are two things at play here. There is a practicality and expediency issue in terms of how quickly something can be put in place but there is also an ideological viewpoint as to whether pensions of this type should be managed on a private basis or whether there should be larger public involvement. There is the question of which does better and which acts more in the interests of the individual, as Senator Burke, Deputy Ó Cuív and I have been suggesting, and which works better in the interests of the State in terms of the investment decisions that are made in the longer term. It would be for this committee to go back to the Department to ask those questions. Somebody along the line made a decision to substantially alter the structure of the CPA as presented in the straw man versus the structure of the CPA as we see it within this general scheme. It is for us, as a committee, to ask the question as to why, because I think it balances a practicality and an ideological viewpoint in making that decision.

I am concerned that we do not have a good line of sight in terms of what happens to pensions at the end of this process. I understand the rationale that it is a while away yet but, certainly, when we are asking people to make investment decisions, they need that line of sight. I would question the idea of how engaged people are going to be in managing their pension provision because the exact cohort we are targeting are people who are not actively engaged in their pension provision. I would have to say from my own personal experience that I am not good at it. We all think “I am never going to be old so I don't need to worry about that now, and the lads need new shoes.” We all make those decisions all of the time. I am not sure it is reasonable to suggest that the people who are being specifically targeted by auto-enrolment are going to be proactively engaging with their pensions manager to figure out if their priorities and their ideological viewpoints are being mirrored in their investment strategies. I am not sure that is what is going to happen.

As I said, I am not sure there is a question at this point in the conversation and I am probably synopsising, but there may be a few aspects that the witnesses want to pick up on.