Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome Pádraig Peyton and his SIPTU colleagues who are in the Gallery this evening. In 2020, politicians from all parties got a very clear message from the voters. Workers rejected the Government policy of the incremental increases in the pension age. The voters forced a fairly substantial U-turn by the Government parties and the Labour Party. Workers also want the option to continue to work on the same terms and conditions of employment. In short, workers want choice and I agree with them. Not alone was this clear at the last general election, a recent poll conducted by RED C for theBusiness Postshows that the opinion of the electorate has not changed. We need to understand that workers are up for the conversation about funding. They are not stupid and know how finances work. Workers know that pensions are not free. They do not appreciate being patronised. They understand they must pay for their pension and they want to be part of that conversation. We have one of the lowest rates of employer PRSI in the developed world. I would be interested to hear if the Government believes that this should not change and that the only change should be for workers who will be required to work while retirement gets further away from them.

Sinn Féin believes that after a lifetime of work at the age of 65, a worker should be able to retire on the full pension rate of pay. That right was abolished by the Fine Gael-Labour Party Government in 2013. We want that position reversed and replaced with a choice to access the pension rate of pay at 65 or continue to work on the same terms and conditions of employment.

Not many of us in this House will ever truly understand what a lifetime of backbreaking work does to a person's body, but we can certainly show empathy and try to understand that many workers are simply not able to continue after the age of 65. I am pleased that this has been recognised in the committee's report. Recommendation 10 provides for the right to access the pension rate of pay in limited circumstances at the age of 65. This is a very welcome development and I would be interested in the Minister of State's response. Being able to access the pension rate means they can realistically consider stopping work. For those who are waiting on tables, laying blocks, stocking shelves, cleaning or doing any other physically demanding work, that extra year would make an enormous difference.

The committee further recommends that legislation be developed to ban the use of mandatory retirement clauses in contracts and this should be backdated to include current contracts. This is essential and the good news is that Sinn Féin has legislation ready to go. We introduced it in the previous Dáil and we have sought leave to introduce it in the next few weeks.

When debating pensions and accessing the State pension, we often get bogged down in how we will fund it. This bypasses what we want to fund.

The abolition of mandatory retirement clauses is an essential part of the funding discussion, which means we have to take account of the impact this could have. If we give workers the choice to retire at 65, many will opt to work on because they want to do so and some because they have to do so. Those who can do so should be facilitated. We have to factor their contribution into any discussion we have on funding.

Likewise, the Government needs to move beyond saying it believes in a total contributions approach and actually publish what it is talking about. We need to future-proof pension provision, take account of the impact of the total contributions approach and be mindful of a recommendation of the Commission on Pensions to the effect that it supports measures which encourage economic growth and competitiveness. The Government has been shown up for having a complete lack of imagination in this regard and has overestimated the impact that raising the pension age ever upwards will have on long-term pension provision. We need to focus on the potential that the creation of a high-growth, high-wage economy could have for long-term financing of pensions. We can and should look at the collective impact of decent wages, high-value, high-growth jobs, the abolition of mandatory retirement and the total contributions approach. That is what should frame our discussions.

If she were here, I would encourage the Minister - perhaps the junior Minister, Deputy Madigan, will pass this on to her - to take on board the work of SIPTU economist Michael Taft. He has done great work on the potential in making a substantial contribution to funding pensions and future-proofing pension provision by investing in indigenous industry and ensuring that the recommendation of the pensions commission on encouraging economic growth as a mechanism for funding is put into practice. I wish to put on the record my thanks to the members of the Stop67 campaign, who have worked hard to undo the damage done by the Fine Gael-Labour Government, in particular the Labour Minister of the day, who forced workers onto the dole at the age of 65. I am glad that decision was reversed. We were told at the time the decision was taken that there was no other option but, what do you know, another option was found. I thank the secretariat and the members of the committee, in particular my colleagues, na Teachtaí Claire Kerrane and Paul Donnelly and Senator Gavan.

See this speech in context