Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

There is a fundamental difference between the view of the Minister of State and the Government and our view when it comes to retirement. The Minister of State and the Government think it is appropriate for people at retirement to be paid a jobseeker’s rate of €203. We do not. The Minister of State and the Government think it is fine for workers who have paid into the social insurance fund for decades - some for 30, 40 or more years - not to be able to access their pension at retirement. We do not. To be clear, we seek in this motion to restore the State pension transition for people retiring at 65. It was a mistake to abolish that in 2014. I am still waiting for someone in government to tell me what will happen if the proposed pension age increases go ahead. Will we have a situation where the new benefit payment for 65-year-olds becomes the new benefit payment for 65- and 66-year-olds? Will there be a gap of two years where people are paid a jobseeker’s rate, losing out on over €4,700 in that time? We must be the only country in the world to place people who are retiring on a jobseeker’s rate payment.

I know the Minister of State will tell us how adequate our State pension rate is and he will probably compare it to the rate in the North. That is not in question this evening. The rate in question is €203 per week. That rate is far from adequate; in fact, it is set below the poverty line. When one talks about adequacy, one does not talk about the cost of living. A EUROSTAT report was issued today showing that prices in Ireland for goods and services are the joint second highest in Europe and were 36% higher than the average across the EU last year. We are one of the most expensive countries in Europe for food. Utility bills are 78% more expensive than the EU average. We really should leave the argument in relation to how adequate our rates are right there.

The Minister of State will also tell us there is no mandatory retirement age in Ireland, which ignores the reality that every year people are forced to retire at the age of 65 because they are contractually obliged to do so. This is an issue and was acknowledged as such in the last Dáil when a Sinn Féin Bill to abolish mandatory retirement was passed unanimously. We need to progress that.

We should let people remain at work if they wish and are willing and able to do so. We should also let them continue to contribute their PRSI into the social insurance fund. That is a win-win situation. This is committed to in the programme for Government but it can only be of benefit if we allow for longer working lives.

I expect the Minister of State will use the North not just to compare what is beyond comparison in relation to the rates but also to highlight the fact the North has a state pension age of 66, without putting on the record the reality of the North, which is important to do. Westminster determines the pension age and decided to increase it to 66. If we departed from that, we would have to cover the cost out of the tiny block grant we get to run the North. The Minister of State will also know we have extremely limited revenue-raising powers in the North. It is important to put that on the record because it is common practice in here for the Government to use the North in debates like this, rarely in any positive way. It shows an arrogance and ignorance on behalf of Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael to throw an argument like that out. It shows a lack of information as to how the North works.

We make no apology for reiterating the calls clearly made by the people in the polls last February in the general election and saying we need to put an end to the mad situation of, first, telling people they can no longer do their job at 65 and, second, telling them they have to retire having done their work and contributed for decades and will receive a jobseeker’s payment of €203. It is an insult. The people have said it and been clear. We are saying it and we are clear. I hope the Government considers supporting this motion.

See this speech in context