Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)

I am very conscious that making any public comment is like walking on glass in dealing with this legislation, whether from the Minister or any other Member. I have followed the debate from my office this morning and noted the careful contributions of all Deputies who have spoken thus far. Let us be honest about this matter. One reason people are careful about the way in which they address these issues is the public perception that Members are overpaid. This is a most unfair public perception given the hours Members devote to the work they carry out. For fear of opprobrium from the public and especially from members of the print media, Members lack the courage to defend their work and the hours they spend carrying it out.

My view is simple. The country is confronted by a major economic crisis. It behoves every Member to do his or her duty with regard to the salaries or allowances received and to ensure in so far as other sectors within the economy are experiencing reductions, that we reduce our remuneration in a manner that is appropriate and that takes account of the parlous state of the public finances. On a personal level I make no complaint about any impact of the imposition of the pension levy or any reductions that will result from the proposed legislation on myself or other colleagues in the House. It is important to consider what is taking place in a constructive and fair manner and to tease out the legislation in the same manner in which we would tease out legislation applicable outside the House.

An understanding of the motives of the Minister in introducing the legislation is important. There are elements of cowardice in the manner in which this is being dealt. I trust the Minister will not interpret this as a personal charge against him and it is not so intended. However, it is a charge that could be levelled against the Government, a political charge based on two or three aspects of the legislation and what I interpret as the politics of it.

I have listened with great interest to the remarks on ministerial pensions and constitutional issues. It is easy for me to comment on these issues because I am not the happy recipient of a ministerial pension and I need not make a declaration of interest. However, it is unfathomable that the Minister's legislation seeks to reduce the ministerial pensions of sitting Deputies by 25% on the basis of some advice on constitutional issues which suggests he cannot interfere with them at all. This is a complete shibboleths and a total nonsense. Either there is a constitutional reason not to interfere with pensions, period, and the 25% reduction or any reduction of the Taosieach's pension is unconstitutional, or one can interfere with the pensions and there is no constitutional issue.

There is clear evidence of political cowardice because it seems there are those in receipt of ministerial pensions who have no difficulty in terminating receipt of those pensions on the Opposition side of the House. Some have done so already and I understand some have indicated they would do so if the multiple members of Fianna Fáil sitting on the benches opposite were willing to voluntarily set aside their ministerial pensions for the lifetime of this Dáil. There is political cowardice because the Taoiseach and the Minister for Finance have not told the Fianna Fáil Members on the backbenches who are former Ministers that former Ministers have an obligation to set an example for the rest of the country and this is the political decision they are being asked to accept.

That would have allowed the Minister to leave aside the niceties of legislation or constitutional issues and he would not have had to introduce this Bill at all because there would have been a consistent voluntary agreement. If the Minister had introduced a measure which either reduced to a greater extent the ministerial pensions of sitting Deputies who are not currently Ministers, or if he had terminated them entirely with perhaps a lead-in period to allow people adjust, which Members would have launched a constitutional action? Are there former Fianna Fáil Ministers sitting quietly on the benches supporting the Government who have indicated they would withdraw support or launch a constitutional action if their pensions are abolished? I do not believe there is a single Member of the House who would do this. It would create a very interesting political predicament for members of Government if, for example, Deputy Woods - I am not suggesting he would do so - or Deputy O'Rourke, who has given up her ministerial pension in fairness to her, launched a constitutional challenge. I do not believe this will happen as this is where the political cowardice lies. People outside this House find it incomprehensible that former Ministers who are still Members of this House in receipt of a Dáil salary are also in receipt of a pension as former Ministers.

I wish to raise a matter which I find quite odd in the legislation and if I am incorrect I know the Minister will correct me. Deputy Bruton has already made some comment on the issue of increments. In this context I declare an interest as someone who has been a Member of the House for 23 years, and together with many other Deputies I am at the higher end of the incremental scale. If I run in the next election with the knowledge that my increments are to be taken away from me, that is a voluntary decision I will make. If I am committed to public service and I wish to continue to be a Member of this House - which at this time I would wish to be, although I would like to be a Member with Fine Gael in Government and the procedures of the House reformed - increments will not remotely influence my decision to run in the next election.

There is one aspect which is extremely odd. I wonder what legal advice the Minister has received in the realm of constitutional law and legitimate expectation. It seems there is built into this legislation a direct incentive which in my view is also an ageist provision which is designed to discourage Members of this House who have long service, who have been here for 21 years or longer, or who are perhaps hitting the ages of 60 or 70, from running again. My perspective and understanding of the legislation is that if I as a Deputy - I have no intention of doing this, just in case the Minister or any of my constituency colleagues might think I have - decided to retire at the next election I would have a pension at a particular level. Of course in Dublin South we are committed to re-electing three Fine Gael TDs in the next election and I am looking forward to achieving this. If, however, I ran in the next election and were unfortunate enough not to be re-elected, I would be financially better off pension-wise than should I run in the next election, be re-elected and then six months' later if there is another election, I lost my seat. There is a whole series of Deputies on the Fianna Fáil backbenches-----

See this speech in context