Mr. Declan Lawlor:

If employees were asked what it said in their contracts of employment, most would respond by asking what contract of employment and saying they did not have a clue what their contracts said because they could not find them when they went looking for them.

We have not had particular discussions with the relevant bodies about complications with social welfare benefits.

We have not had specific discussions with the relevant bodies on that. What increasingly comes up now is that the rules around qualifying for the jobseeker's benefit at the age of 65 are overcomplicated. For someone who works to the age of 65 and then applies for jobseeker's benefit, it is relatively straightforward. The main complication around the benefit tends to arise for those who have retired a little earlier and subsequently apply for the benefit payment at the age of 65 because applicants must have a minimum of 13 paid contributions in the governing contribution year. Nobody had ever heard of the governing contribution.

There are a lot of complications around how people qualify for jobseeker's benefit. When people reach the age of 65 they do not automatically receive the benefit payment for 65-year-olds, even though the name suggests they will. It is not quite as simple as that. There should be some clarity around that to make it simpler for people to understand what they need to do to qualify for the benefit. That would be a big help. For those who decide to continue working after the age of 65 and who will not claim that benefit, this legislation will go some way towards addressing that. I accept the point others made in asking why we should even have 66 as a compulsory retirement age but at least this will be a bit of progress.