Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Clare Daly for her kind and gracious words regarding my approach as Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport. I know that we do not see eye to eye on much, but I acknowledge that she is sincere in her approach and motivation on this and other transport issues.

The 15 amendments in this grouping relate to the superannuation provisions contained in the Bill. Half of them are technical or drafting amendments which I have tabled. I would like to address the more substantial amendments together.

Four of the amendments tabled, amendments Nos. 3, 15, 16 and 18, are similar to amendments tabled on Committee Stage. Amendments Nos. 3 and 16 relate to deleting or partially deleting section 34 from the Bill. The two amendments proposed by Deputy Dessie Ellis, Nos. 15 and 18, concern an appeals mechanism for deferred members of the IAS scheme and a statutory bar on closing pension schemes which have not reached the minimum 90% funding standard. My position on these amendments has not changed and I will not be accepting them.

On the proposed appeals mechanism, it remains the position that any provision along these lines is a matter for national pensions policy. It is not appropriate to consider the issue in isolation, purely in the context of the IAS scheme. There are already two independent appeals mechanisms available to members of any pension scheme, namely, the Pensions Ombudsman and the courts.

On the question of statutorily preventing the closure of the IAS scheme, unless and until it reaches a minimum figure of 90% of the minimum funding standard, as I made clear on Committee Stage and in the Seanad, I cannot impose or prescribe solutions to the current difficulties in the scheme. If accepted, the amendment would add another constraint to what is already a highly complex and inflexible pensions scheme. It also carries the implication that the scheme could continue indefinitely, with an unresolved substantial deficit, in a manner that would be inconsistent with the Pensions Act 1990. That is not tenable.

See this speech in context