Eamonn Maloney (Dublin South West, Labour) | Oireachtas source

When the referendum is over, I will pay my return visit to the Cooley Mountains after that contribution by the Deputy, and I might meet the man who inspired him.

Like other speakers, I share the sentiment of the motion. However, as stated by Deputy McDonald sentiment is one thing and substance is another. The motion does not quantify what people want to say about those in receipt of large pensions and lump sums. Without quantifying this, it is meaningless. It is a little like attaching the argument which has been made by various Members on both sides of the House, including from the Labour Party, that people on salaries in excess of €100,000 should be paying more tax, with which I disagree. The man and woman in the street can see through politicians' calls for an increase in the level of taxation which does not kick in at the base on which they are on. No one has put forward the proposal that we should start with politicians' salaries, which are two and a half times the industrial wage. People in receipt of jobseeker's allowance of €12,000 per annum can see through a proposal which provides that people earning in excess of €100,000 should be paying more because they see through politicians.

Most Members of this House agree that the people in receipt of excessive pensions need to be reigned in. The word "immoral" has been used in relation to pensions by some people. However, that is not the language I prefer to use. There is no justification for any man or woman, be he or she a banker, bishop or politician, to be in receipt of a pension of €8,000 per week. That cannot be justified. The bankers are employed by us, not as legislators but as taxpayers, and they are accountable to us. No one should be in receipt of pensions of €500,000 or €600,000 and so on.

We live in an extraordinary country. When attempts are made to address issues such as property rights or upward only rents, it is stated that those involved are protected by the Constitution. This Saturday, we will vote in a referendum to protect the rights of children because the Constitution has not done so to date. Members on all sides of the House agree that these people should not be in receipt of large pensions and lump sums. It is extraordinary that these people are also protected by the Constitution. It is some Constitution given it does not do much for the ordinary man and woman. As stated by another speaker, the rich get all the pleasure. In the case of our Constitution not only do they get the pleasure, they get the protection. I do not believe, as some people have suggested, that they will go to court. Let them go to court. If they want to go to the High Court and take on us as taxpayers, let it happen.

See this speech in context