David Norris (Independent)

I also have a few questions for the Minister. Will the time limit operate both ways? It will apply to contributions that have been inaccurately taken from a contributor such that the State will be in the debt of the person. If it is the other way around and there has been underpayment as a result of the State's inefficiency due to an oversight on the part of the payer, will this be subject to the four-year time limit? It seems that what is sauce for the Government should be sauce for the individual citizen also.

Section 8(4) states, "Regulations may provide for the method of calculation in the amount of any contribution due to be repaid". I would not have thought many calculations would be required. I would have thought also that if an overpayment became clear, the overpayment would be self-evident. What may be concealed behind section 8(4), which would concern me, is that a method of calculation may be arrived at which would not be to the advantage of the citizen in claiming a refund. I would have thought people who made these contributions did so on the basis they were very often deducted automatically from their income and they simply assumed the authorities had it right. I am not convinced of the need for a limitation of this kind. Is this kind of four year limit in operation in any other financial institutions, such as banks? Can the Minister give any precedent for this? I know there is a statute of limitations in criminal cases, for example. There have been a number of situations where the banks have been very cavalier with investors' or savers' money. Do similar rules in apply in ordinary financial life?