Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister of State to the House and welcome the debate. I thank Senator White for her work in this area. Her booklet is of great help to us all. I called for this debate last week, as did Senator White, as a result of a number of articles that appeared recently in the newspapers which brought the issue to our attention once again. It is an issue I want to continue to raise in the House because it is about raising awareness and ensuring that we keep this issue at the top of the agenda. With a growing older population in Ireland, it is more important than ever that we keep it to the top of the agenda and address the issues we know exist and affect older people.

In Ireland today, there are almost 750,000 people aged over 55 and this will increase significantly in the coming decades. This raises many issues that must be addressed and many challenges, especially in the areas of nursing care, community care and hospital care. We deal with these issues when discussing health. In my contribution I intend to concentrate on ageism in terms of how we view older people and how I would like to have them participate more in our society. I will steer away from the negative attitudes many in society have about older people.

While I am not sure at what age one would be categorised as an older person, older people are an untapped resource of which we should make much more use. There are thousands of older people who are fit and able to contribute to society in many ways. Departments need to recognise this and we must make further changes to legislation and bring about new policies to support longer working lives and later retirement.

People are living longer and are far healthier than earlier generations. Increasing longevity is an indicator of social and economic progress and we need to reap the benefits of that longevity. We need to harness the wealth of experience possessed by our population. Age Action Ireland expressed this view when it stated:

[T]he state could easily encourage 'at-home' work through the use of broadband internet. It is hardly beyond the wit of human beings to devise other ways in which knowledge and skills amassed over decades, can be used for the benefit of others. Useful, paid employment (for example telesales or monitoring) could easily become a feature of older people's lives.

We need to consider the retirement age and the United Kingdom's recent decision in this regard. Anti-age discrimination legislation reinforces the message that age is no longer a barrier to work. While there will always be those who, for health reasons or perhaps because of the type of hard physical work with which they were involved, cannot work beyond the age of 65 or even earlier, there are many more who would love the option to work beyond 65, either full-time or part-time. As Age Action Ireland stated: "the seventies should now be seen as mere middle age". I agree with this assessment.

Many would see their 60s and 70s as a time to do something completely different with new challenges. We need to provide opportunities for people to upskill as well as providing flexibility in the workplace and ensuring that employers do not discriminate against older workers. Older employees are often seen by many employers as being a valuable resource bringing with them a wealth of experience. They also have a better understanding of, and are more sensitive to, the needs of older customers.

In the retail sector, including banking and many other aspects of commercial life, older people often prefer being helped by staff who are closer in age to them, rather than by staff who correspond to their grandchildren's age group. Five or ten years ago, banks had an aggressive early retirement policy for staff, as a result of which one would hardly find a grey-haired person working in a bank. It was a retrograde step, however, because the experience of older staff members was lost. Older customers felt more vulnerable when they could not find a staff member of their own age group. Such a situation must be avoided in future and, thankfully, the position is changing. We are seeing less early retirement of people aged 50 or over.

Extending people's working lives, thus delaying their retirement, brings many benefits and helps to maintain a certain standard of living for longer. While we hear much about the problems of pensions there are positive things we can do in this regard, many of which I have promoted during debates in this House.

By deferring retirement for a number of years we could help people's pension provision. We could also have more flexible retirement schemes, combining part-time work with pensions. We need to examine the possibility of reforming the tax-free lump sum, for instance, which is given at retirement to workers who have occupational pension schemes. This tax incentive works against pensioners in that it depletes their pension fund by 25%. It really is a tax incentive abused by wealthy people at the expense of the majority of taxpayers. Changes were made to this aspect in the last budget and I am hoping the Minister for Finance will make further changes in this regard in the forthcoming budget.

I can understand why pensioners with small occupational pension schemes might wish to avail of the tax-free lump sum. Why should they not do so? However, I do not believe that is the purpose of their pension fund. We need to address that issue. If we want people to save for their pensions we should encourage them through tax incentives to leave their pension fund intact so it will be there for their retirement. Therefore, instead of giving them a tax-free lump sum we should give them a tax incentive to leave that lump sum in place. In fact, if they were given the same tax incentive to leave the lump sum in place many people would do so. That, in turn, would help their pension when they wish to draw it down. Such a system should be ring-fenced for those on small and medium pensions, and not open to abuse by wealthy people.

We also need to promote more positive attitudes to ageing. We live in a society that is obsessed with youth. Images that confront us daily in newspapers, magazines, billboards and on television feature beautiful young people. Meanwhile, older people are stereotyped as unattractive, inactive or a burden on society, which contributes to negative attitudes. Such stereotyping is most unfair and, as the Minister of State said, it is also hurtful to many of our older people. We should tackle such negative images in any way we can.

Older people's groups need to be resourced and supported to engage in community advocacy. Such groups can provide information, advice and support to older people who may be experiencing discrimination. In addition, they can promote awareness of relevant legislation and of ageism cases that have been taken successfully before the Equality Authority or at a tribunal. Such awareness enables older people to become active in their communities and in society at large.

Legislation, institutional change and new investment are required if equality is to be implemented for older people. That view has been already expressed by the Equality Authority. I agree with the comment in the Minister of State's speech that we need to do a lot of work in this regard. I also agree with the goals that he has set out for older people. However, the use of the term "long-term goals" bothers me because we need to tackle many such issues quickly. I would prefer to see them being regarded as short-term goals.

We have increasing problems with older people who wish to remain in their homes but who are not getting the services they require to do so. I realise that such services cost money but it costs far more to put older people into nursing homes. It is disturbing that, time and again, services are not available for people who seek them. Such services — including home help, a public health nurse or aids like proper beds, chairs or ground-floor accommodation — would enable elderly people to stay at home. It these services are not available, however, some families may decide that their loved ones should enter a nursing home, and that is a sad day. It is short-term thinking when we know it costs more to keep an older person in a nursing home than at home. The Minister of State may list all the things that need to be done but they should not be considered as long-term goals. We need to change that perspective because we want these goals to be short-term. They should be fast-tracked to ensure we have proper supports for families caring for elderly relatives.

Earlier this week I attended a meeting arranged by the Carers' Association. I am sure the Minister of State meets such people in his own constituency but it was interesting to hear the stories of those carers. They were complaining of a lack of support but it is not good enough in this day and age that we cannot provide such support for them.

Disability legislation currently provides for an assessment of needs for people with disabilities but legislation should also provide for such an assessment for older people. They should be entitled, as of right, to have the requisite services provided. People should not have to struggle to obtain rights for their loved ones. I would like to see older people being entitled to an assessment of their needs.

While much work is being done to protect and enhance the lives of older people, a lot more needs to be done. As the population increases and older people become a larger percentage of voters, attitudes will change. If such changes come about only as a result of pressure, however, it will be a bad thing. I hope the changes will be made because they need to be, and I look forward to that day.