Shane Ross (Dublin South, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for his reply but I am afraid that, while there is nothing in it which is inaccurate or in error, it does not address the main kernel of the motion. The purpose of this motion was deliberately and calculatedly to look at the advantages, pensions and lump sums that people at the very top, including ourselves, receive from the State.

I make this point in the context of the back and forth attacks that have taken place but it also was meant deliberately to draw attention to Members and to debate these matters in an honest and serious way. The motion included Deputies and Senators and what they receive in this debate because it is only right, as Deputy Shortall so eloquently noted, that Members somehow have the moral authority to dictate or to tell other people how their pensions should be allocated, administered and given, if Members of this House of all sides, including people present, are perceived as doing an honest and fair job, as well as receiving equitable pensions.

This motion certainly brings Members under pressure as they are not whiter than white or particularly flawless in this regard. On this side of the House, Members receive a very generous leader's allowance and they accept that. However, they believe it is only right that this matter should be brought into the public arena, examined and debated by Members and then be exposed to the public as having been rightly examined and allocated.

See this speech in context