Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for giving me the opportunity to speak about the Bill. I represent a constituency that has many current, former and retired airport staff. My agenda in this debate will always be to preserve and create employment but also to treat people with respect and dignity, particularly the former workers and pensioners whose voices must be heard in the debate and the legislation. I will highlight some of the cases I have encountered in recent weeks and some of the letters I have received from pensioners on the matter, detailing the hurt it has caused them and their families. It is welcome that the Minister is in the Chamber because there is an urgent need for him to listen to such concerns and, above all, act on them. The people concernd have worked all their lives, built up the companies and made a significant contribution to them. That is the current position.

One IASS pensioner wrote:

I am an ex-employee of SR Technics, made redundant in 2009. I am due my pension of €400 per week as advised and confirmed in writing by the IASS pension office. Under the Constitution, I am entitled to my Government pension as well as my occupational pension, as confirmed by the Taoiseach in the Dáil in response to a question as to why the bankers' pensions cannot be touched. [We should examine this issue in the broader debate.] The trustees of the IASS intend winding down the scheme to comply with their legal obligations. Aer Lingus has not complied with the 2012 outstanding court ruling in relation to the pension deficit and is flouting the law of the land with impunity. The Government, as a shareholder of both the DAA and Aer Lingus, is complicit in this appalling state of affairs, as well as other influential shareholders who stand to gain hundreds of millions of euro as a result of raiding my pension, which I was obliged to contribute to when I started in Aer Lingus.

New pension legislation was enacted in 2013 and this correspondent asked me what impact it would have on his total pension income based on today's calculations and when the scheme is wound up. He says he needs this information to give his wife peace of mind about what she will have to survive on when he is no longer alive, as she will then automatically lose 50% of his occupational pension. He has also asked me to seek the interpretation of the 2013 pension law from the Attorney General, apply it to his circumstances and to advise him on the moneys she is likely to receive in the worst case scenario.

Many others have contacted me on the issue. One constituent who wrote to me sent the same letter to the Minister which read:

Section 32A of the Seanad Bill appears to give wide-ranging powers to the employers of the IASS to transfer members to a new scheme without consultation, particularly to the trustees to unilaterally make amendments to provide for the cessation of benefits and contributions by all members and their employers. This was not previously possible. The Bill is due for discussion, and must not be allowed to go through without a challenge. Section 32A of the Bill appears to be written solely to facilitate the agenda of the employers and the Government via the trustees of the IASS. It appears that my pension is being sacrificed in a bid to sell off the airline.

These are the views of the people on the ground, former and current members of the schemes. While the Government, in particular the Minister, has stated it cannot interfere in the running of a private, commercial company, it can introduce and condone a Bill which removes all rights of almost 15,000 IASS members. Why was social welfare legislation not used to make changes to the operation of section 50? This would have affected all defined benefit schemes, whereas including the changes in this Bill ensures the changes are specific to the IASS. The recent expert panel findings will be totally ignored if section 32A is enacted.

My constituent's letter also states:

The pension I paid for 34 years is being unfairly targeted and the Government is riding roughshod over my pension rights. Section 9 of the Aer Lingus Act 2004 states that IASS members could not be transferred to another scheme on less favourable terms.

I raise these issues on behalf of the pensioners to highlight the grave injustice against them. They are seen as a weak target and a soft touch. The Minister should listen to those who built up Aer Lingus and SRT, those who have ideas about the further development of the economy and job creation, as well as the pensioners who will suffer massive reductions in their pensions.

They have rights and deserve to be treated fairly. The Minister must take up the fight and get on with dealing with these issues.

I turn to the detail of the legislation itself. Its purpose is to establish a new State-owned commercial entity, Shannon Group, to which to transfer the ownership of the Shannon Airport Authority and Shannon Development. This is the positive part of the legislation. The objective is to build on the combined strengths of those two companies as a catalyst for the development of strategic sectoral opportunities, particularly in the aviation sector, including the expansion and development of an aviation services centre at Shannon. The Bill also provides for a range of other matters, including the Irish aviation services superannuation scheme, which I dealt with earlier. It will create an offence of dazzling the pilots of aircraft with lasers, update airport by-laws, establish a new insolvency regime for aircraft leasing companies and update travel trade legislation to meet EU requirements.

See this speech in context