Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North-West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

It is interesting dealing with a case that was before the courts and, as a result, has had to come before the Executive and now the Legislature. Some of the difficulty with this week's debates in regard to speaking time is that there is often huge confusion as to the difference between the Executive and the Legislature. They are different things.

When you take those two arms of Irish democracy, the courts are that third countercheck. I pay tribute to Mr. O'Meara in taking this course because where the rights could not be vindicated through either the Executive or the Legislature, the courts served their role in this case. The judgment very clearly set out a roadmap for fairness, and I acknowledge the work of the Minister in responding quickly to that as well.

Our social welfare system has a long history dating back to when there were very little social protection provisions for people who needed them most. As a former spokesperson for social protection, it is one of the most complex things to understand the multiple schemes that exist. Increasingly, there are those schemes that are pay-related social insurance benefits for having paid into the scheme, and then there are social protection payments which are there by right for those people who are in need.

As we continue to look at how we can improve social protection, increasingly we need to look at making pay-related social insurance more value-for-money for those people who pay in. The minimal difference between a contributory pension and a non-contributory pension often means many people ask the question, "Why did I pay in if I am not going to be getting much more?" Of course, the difference is that when you pay in, you get a payment by right of paying in as opposed to a means-tested payment and we always have to remember that. I would encourage the Minister, as we progress to reform social protection, that idea of improving the value for money for people who pay into the PRSI system is something we should absolutely examine.

On that note, while not touching directly on the issue of the Bill, there are many people who are prevented from paying into the social protection system. They are people who worked in our public services, in local authorities, in places like An Post or Telecom Éireann and so on. They were prevented from paying a full A-class stamp. The reality is that for many of those people, the burden falls not on them but on their partners. They are unable to make an A-class contribution and when both the husband and wife retire, regardless of who worked for that period, the partner is subjected to a means-tested payment. Often both of them are excluded from many of the very important cost-saving and cost-of-living measures we put in place because they are not entitled to a contributory pension by virtue of not having enough stamps. It is just another example, and I think that burden falls mostly on women.

There is a dwindling but large number of women who contributed to the home over many years, and their partners worked in what were good semi-State and State jobs. They were not allowed pay a full contributory pension, and at the other side of their retirement, they do not get any social welfare payment, are not entitled to any of the cost-of-living top-ups and often fall foul of others. In some of those schemes, like the CIÉ pension scheme, for example, we have not had an increase in that scheme for the best part of a decade. With regard to what were previously good social protection measures, we need to continue to do them. As in this case here, the O'Meara case, social protection should never be something that is set in stone. It should be a constantly evolving process.

I welcome what the Minister has done. He has brought some certainty for surviving cohabitants who have lived together for two years or more and had children together who qualify for the pension. Those who lived together for five years or more, irrespective of children, will also qualify, and then for contributory pension payments, it will be backdated to 22 January 2024, the date of the Supreme Court decision. Additionally, qualifying cohabitants will have access to the bereaved parents grant and the bereaved partners non-contributory pension.

As I said, it is a welcome step. It is the first opportunity I have had to wish the Minister well in his role. As somebody who took over from him as the spokesperson on social protection in Fianna Fáil, I pay tribute to his legacy and the work that he did. Many of the stakeholders who I met spoke very highly of the Minister's interest, and I would say they were particularly pleased with the Minister's appointment because he understands the issues. Whether it is this issue before the House or the issue I raised around those people prevented from making contributions but are subject to means tests, or the many other areas of the Minister's responsibility, I wish him the very best of luck. If he could come back to me on the issue in writing, I would appreciate it.

See this speech in context