Eugene Murphy (Roscommon-Galway, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputies Willie Penrose, Maureen O'Sullivan and Clare Daly are raising this matter. They will have four minutes in total to make an initial statement and the Minister or Minister of State has two four minutes to reply.

Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thought we had two minutes each.

Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Acting Chairman, in fairness, we should have two minutes each.

Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In fairness, three of us are sharing time. That allocation of time is incorrect.

Eugene Murphy (Roscommon-Galway, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have been told the new Standing Orders were introduced today and I will have to go by those.

Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is a disgrace.

Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In fairness, the allocation has always been two minutes when more than one Deputy raises the same issue.

Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Acting Chairman can extend the time allocation.

Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That will have to be done for today. Did Deputy Crowe and his colleagues know that the allocation was four minutes regardless of the number of Deputies who raise the same issue?

Eugene Murphy (Roscommon-Galway, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I can see the Deputies are not very happy. I am prepared to give the Deputies two minutes each and show them good discretion today. Is that okay with the Minister of State?

Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Acting Chairman is a good country man.

Eugene Murphy (Roscommon-Galway, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Thank you, Deputy Penrose.

Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am glad to have an opportunity, along with my colleagues, to raise an issue concerning the impact of the decision by the Central Remedial Clinic, CRC, board to terminate the Irish Pensions Trust, IPT, pension with immediate effect for the employees of CRC. I want to state that I communicated by letter on 2 June 2016 with the chief executive officer, CEO, the chief financial officer, CFO, the chairperson of the board and the human resources, HR, manager on this issue in a comprehensive fashion on behalf of the employees. I have not even received the courtesy of an acknowledgement of or a reply to the same correspondence. That is symptomatic of the way the employees, who were and are members of this defined benefit scheme, were treated in recent weeks by their employer. I do not believe the most right wing employer would be so dismissive and uncaring and I will not tolerate any body or institution behaving in such a fashion and acting in blatant disregard of the interests of their valuable employees, past and present.

I was motivated by this glaring disregard to wonder aloud who was in place and whose responsibility it was to protect, promote and advocate for the interests of workers when they were members of the IPT scheme. As I said, the pension scheme was abruptly terminated with immediate effect as and from Wednesday, 18 May 2016 without leave or notice to the relevant staff or any appropriate consultation with the said staff, most of whom have given long years of service. It is notable that, as far as I am aware, nobody has been admitted into the scheme since 2002 and, therefore, there is a finite and definite number of people involved, with only 47 active members of staff currently in the IPT pension, and about 50 deferred and 50 retired members of the scheme, who have been impacted by this unilateral decision.

What I find disturbing is that the CRC is, for the most part, a publicly funded institution whereby employees are subject to contractual arrangements which set out their terms and conditions of employment. In any event, in any employment situation at least one month's notice should be given to the affected personnel whereby any change in their terms and conditions are contemplated.

As I understand it, this scheme has been in existence since 1975. There was not any question about its viability in 2011 but like all defined benefit, DB, schemes, it did not meet the minimum funding standard required that was introduced. However, the staff played a very significant role in ensuring its continued viability and sustainability.

Eugene Murphy (Roscommon-Galway, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have to ask the Deputy to conclude.

Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In recent years they doubled their contribution from 5% to 10% of their wages, and that was accepted by the Pensions Board in February 2012. It is pushing matters to say that this decision to close the scheme was taken just prior to the staff being informed. I have no doubt there was a great deal of evaluation and assessment carried out by the professionals involved. That is why I believe the way the staff were treated is disgraceful. I trust the Minister will deal with this in a comprehensive fashion.

Eugene Murphy (Roscommon-Galway, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy for his co-operation.

Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

For me, the central issue in this matter is that employees were paying into a pension plan for many years. Initially the cost was 5% of their salary and since 2011 it has been 10% of their salary. That was paid in good faith with the belief they would have a pension when they retired. They have now been told that they will not have a pension and we can all imagine how they must be feeling. I am thinking about the human face of this. Some of these people have given 20, 30 and 40 years of faithful, loyal service to the CRC and to the very significant work that it does.

The affected staff were called to a meeting, they had no idea of the agenda and then they were given the catastrophic news about their pensions. My understanding is that there was no formal communication from the CRC or the trustee to the staff. One of the aspects is about the process. It is the complete opposite of what constitutes good practice in a wind-up; in fact, it is an example of bad practice, poor management, a very fast process and no consultation. There is also an aspect of a conflict of interest and of questions around the trustee, their fitness to practise as a trustee and whether they undertook the mandatory training and whether the staff even know who they were. It is appalling the way that the CRC staff have been kept out of the loop on this. The CRC was working away with legal advice, but the affected staff need access to that professional advice, legal and actuarial. I ask that the CRC would contribute to and support them in getting that advice.

Why did management make the decision to close the scheme? On what advice did it make that decision? Why were the staff not allowed to see that advice? It is an appalling example of very poor employer-employee relationships. All the staff have been left very much high and dry at this stage. I thought the CRC would be much more careful about this in view of the other controversies that have surrounded it in recent times.

Eugene Murphy (Roscommon-Galway, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy has finished right on time.

Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is something incredibly rotten around this.

It has the potential to put other CRC controversies into the shade. Overnight, unilaterally and without warning, a pension scheme was shut down that loyal staff members had paid into all their working lives. Subsequent to that decision, those staff members have been unable to meet the members of the board of the CRC who have no problem going to a gala dinner in the Burlington tonight. It is absolutely reprehensible.

As other Deputies have said, the CRC plan in 2011, as with other defined benefits schemes, did not meet the minimum funding standard requirements. On 24 March 2014, the CRC's actuary, Mercer, declared that the funding proposal was on track to meet the minimum standard by next year. If the CRC plan was on track in 2014, why was it closed down in such a hurry by the CRC board with effect from 18 May 2016? Can the Minister answer that? What went wrong between March 2014 and May 2016? Did Mercer give poor financial advice which led to the scheme closing given that contributions increased and a de-risking strategy was put in place?

There are conflicts of interests at the heart of this. Mercer appears on all sides of the equation in this. The company provides administration, actuarial services and consultancy advice to the CRC meanwhile the so-called independent trustee of the plan is the Irish Pension Trust, which is owned by Mercer. It is an absolutely clear-cut case of a conflict of interest. Not only that, it has completely been missed that it appears an integrated, defined-benefit pension scheme with a contribution rate of 35% could not support the continuance of entitlements under the plan. How in God's name can that be? It does not add up. The scheme must be reinstated until such time as comprehensive investigations around this are held. I urge the Minister to secure that.

Eugene Murphy (Roscommon-Galway, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the three Deputies for their co-operation.

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the three Deputies for raising this matter which I take today on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for Health, Deputy Simon Harris. The Central Remedial Clinic, CRC, is funded by the Health Service Executive under section 38 of the Health Act 2004. Therefore, the CRC is accountable in the first instance to the HSE in relation to pay and superannuation matters. The CRC employs approximately 290 people, of whom approximately 45 are members of a privately funded pension plan operated by the trustee, the Irish Pensions Trust. It is important to explain at the outset that neither the Department of Health nor the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform has any role or function in relation to the operation of this funded pension plan which was established some decades ago by the CRC.

Following an extraordinary meeting on 17 May, the board of the CRC decided to cease contributions to the private pension plan. The CRC then issued notice of termination of contributions to the trustee, Irish Pensions Trust Limited. The notice provided that with effect from 18 May 2016, the CRC was terminating its liability to contribute to the plan. Neither the Minister, Deputy Harris, nor the Department had any advance notice from the CRC of its intention to cease contributions to the pension plan. The Department of Health was informed of the CRC decision on 18 May. It is regrettable that the CRC took a decision to cease contributions to the scheme without first consulting with the employees concerned and the HSE. In fact, the Department had previously highlighted to the CRC that any proposal in relation to any pay or pension matter must first be submitted to the HSE. It was also explained to the CRC that Department of Public Expenditure and Reform sanction would be required for any CRC proposal.

Following receipt of information from the CRC on the winding up of the scheme, the CRC was requested as a matter of urgency to prepare viable alternative proposals in conjunction with the HSE. The HSE has today confirmed that it is working with the CRC to find a viable solution in relation to the employees concerned but that as yet, a detailed business case has not been submitted by the CRC. The Minister assures the House that once a detailed proposal is received by the Department, it will be examined as a matter or urgency. The proposal will be considered in conjunction with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, which is responsible for the implementation of Government policy in relation to public service pensions. The Minister and I ask the CRC to work as quickly as possible with the HSE to resolve this situation which has left the employees concerned in a most difficult position.

Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What makes us all very suspicious is that the scheme has €28.5 million in assets and €30.5 million in liabilities, which is a €2 million deficit. It could easily be made up. The Minister of State is no doubt aware that some schemes may have fallen into deficit due to various oscillation of equities and the bond market but these have all recovered. What is perplexing is that there was no consultation with staff to allow them to evaluate this issue and to consider whether to seek further advice by hiring their own actuary, paid for by CRC, to examine the situation and, indeed, whether they might contemplate the scheme remaining in existence by opting to either take reduced benefits or increase their contributions as they had already done to try to maintain existing benefits. It occurred within a couple of weeks of the receipt of the actuarial report. Pursuant to the Pensions Act 1990, it seems to me that the trustees would have had approximately nine months to submit a funding plan and it is clear that over a period of time, the scheme could be got back on track.

Given the section 38 funding, it is time the trustees and the management of the CRC were called before the new Joint Committee on Public Expenditure and Reform and the Committee of Public Accounts to explain why they acted in such a fast fashion. As Deputy Daly asked, why, given that an assurance was given on 24 March 2014 that the pension scheme was on track, did it collapse on 18 May 2016? I ask the Minister to reinstate the scheme as it was until those issues pertaining to the winding up of the scheme are addressed and investigated, including the roles of all the professionals involved at all levels in respect of the operation of the scheme.

Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Were the employer's contributions paid through HSE funding? If so, that is public funding and there is an accountability issue to address. The CRC has shown its disdain for its employees as well as for the relevant Departments and the HSE. The employees feel very much abandoned and crushed in respect of this mess which is not of their making. They are the workers who had to face the public disappointment, disdain and disgust over the other controversies involving the CRC and this is what they are left with now. The affected staff should get the full value of their pensions. I note what the Minister of State said and that it is being treated as a matter of urgency but my question is how anyone can trust the CRC given its behaviour to date on this and other issues. I seek the Minister of State's assurance that this is not going to go off the agenda now that the Topical Issue has been taken and that the CRC will be given a timeframe in which to come back to the Department.

Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister says it is regrettable that the CRC made this decision. I call it bizarre, sinister and highly suspect. It just does not add up. If our concern is to have any meaning whatsoever, the only instruction we should be issuing to the CRC is to reinstate the scheme until comprehensive issues involving the decision to wind it up can be investigated. It does not add up. If one looks at the scheme, it was very well funded. A deficit of €2 million is very little. There were breaches of the Pensions Act. The trustees could have had and lawfully did have nine months to come up with an alternative funding plan. As such, why was a decision taken 18 days after the actuarial assessment? There are serious questions about some of the assumptions applied by Mercer in relation to the scheme. The report which was given to the staff has been redacted in many parts so that we cannot even have an accurate assessment of the actuarial advice that was given. There seems to have been bizarre and questionable behaviour and I urge the Minister to intervene to hold people to account and not just to look at alternatives now. He should halt it, get it back to where it was and hold people to account.

Eugene Murphy (Roscommon-Galway, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputies for co-operating with me under the new rules. I appreciate it.

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank my colleagues for their questions. I will address each specifically. I accept that Deputy Penrose received no acknowledgement. It was a disgrace as far as I am concerned and I will follow up on the issue. Regarding Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan's points on good faith, the great service of the staff and accountability, I have also raised these issues and will discuss them again later. Deputy Clare Daly mentioned the idea of shutting down on a loyal workforce. I am familiar with the staff of the Central Remedial Clinic, CRC. I have made my views known to the board's chairperson many times. Even though this matter is not necessarily in my remit, I have met some of the staff and heard their case. Many of their views have been expressed in the Chamber.

Other issues exist. For example, this raises serious questions of financial and corporate governance. I have concerns in that regard. The majority of the staff are unaffected but I am concerned about the 47 individuals on whom this situation will impact.

I will be answering a question on an issue that I have been addressing in recent weeks, namely, the level of monitoring of this matter. Before yesterday, there was no contact with the HSE since the actuaries began their review. I am demanding answers of the HSE and the CRC as to why there was no communication from either side during this period and what level of monitoring was conducted. Both knew that the problem existed.

The CRC does not have unilateral authority to move employees onto the single public service pension scheme. This matter must be discussed with the HSE. The pension scheme had a serious and escalating gap and it is incredible that such a point was reached with so little information being passed to the HSE or the Minister. I want to see a speedy solution. I am asking the CRC to proceed with its talks with the HSE on this matter and am demanding a full report on the outcome of whatever meetings are held so that we can determine how to proceed in the best interests of the taxpayers and the 47 people affected.