Carol Nolan (Offaly, Independent)

I welcome debate on this critical issue. It is a long time coming. The then Minister, Heather Humphreys, pointed out a number of years ago on Second Stage that auto-enrolment had been spoken about in Ireland for 25 years since the former Minister, Seamus Brennan, first raised it. That being said, I think that a lot of concerns remain around the new regime and how fair, costly or impactful it is actually going to be in practice. There are a number of issues around workers who are earning just over €20,000 losing money to mandatory contributions for the first six months without opt-out flexibility. Of course, this hits low-income families the hardest. Mr. Colm Fagan, former president of the Society of Actuaries in Ireland, has said that it means the administration fee for auto-enrolment for someone with €20 in his or her account would be the same for the person with €2,000 in his or her account. He described the regressive proposal as a disaster for low-paid and temporary workers. The Government's own website asks whether if a person's earnings go below €20,000 a year, will he or she stay in the scheme. The answer provided on the website is "Yes". If a person has been enrolled and his or her earnings subsequently go below €20,000 per year, he or she will stay in the scheme. We need to look further at this particular factor because it seems unfair.

There are the standard concerns around the administrative workload and burden for small businesses. As I understand it, even with minimal setup, employers must match contributions up to 6% of payroll by 2034. How will this not add to the burden of cash-strapped SMEs already trying to navigate energy costs? I also understand that there are ongoing concerns about the scheme and how it will deal with self-employed workers who earn under €20,000 and under-23s who will be sidelined, leaving freelancers without coverage. An additional concern raised during the debates last year - perhaps this could be clarified - is about how auto-enrolment may shift reliance from the universal State pension to private pots, with pro rata calculations under the total contributions approach risking lower payouts for part-time or career gap workers, particularly carers and women who fit into that bracket.

Has that point been dealt with and is there a solution for that particular issue? I would be grateful if the Minister could revert to me with clarity and a reply on that specific point.

The last point I wish to make is that we know there will be no boost to overall retirement adequacy. It has been mentioned that despite the fanfare, the scheme does not raise the inadequate State pension baseline of €13,000 per year, leaving 20% of over-65s, especially renters, in poverty. That is another very real issue that exists.

See this speech in context