Maurice Cummins (Fine Gael)

I formally second the motion so ably proposed by my colleague, Senator Twomey. This is a simple question for Members of this House to decide on. If they disagree with the ministerial pensions being paid to sitting Members of the Dáil or Seanad, they will support the motion. If they agree that the current regime should continue to apply until the next general election, they will support the Government. This is a typical response from an Administration that is frozen like a rabbit caught in the headlights. It is incapable of making any decision and is trying to muddy the waters with issues that have nothing to do with the motion before the House. This is clear from the Government amendment to the motion. It is a simple question either to agree or disagree with the current practice.

Last year Deputy Enda Kenny wrote to the Minister for Finance, Deputy Brian Lenihan, and argued for the immediate removal of these pensions from sitting Members of the Oireachtas. He argued that it should have been done across the board to remove any ambiguity or doubt on the issue. The Government refused to act on this proposal and only committed to removing such pensions from the beginning of the next Dáil, another typical response from this Administration. The Minister indicated he had received legal advice to the effect that the pensions to serving Members could not be abolished, despite which he was able to cut them by 25%. If he could legally reduce these pensions by 25%, why could he not reduce them by 100%? There is considerable confusion surrounding the legal restraint on the Government implementing these changes. Where is the advice of the Attorney General? It has not been furnished to this House or the other House to the best of my knowledge. My party has received opinion from three eminent senior counsel to the effect that there are considerable legal grounds for asserting the constitutionality of the measure in the manner we have proposed in the Oireachtas (allowances to Members) and ministerial and parliamentary offices Bill 2010.

There is a crisis of public confidence in the institutions of State. There is an important role for the Oireachtas in setting a public example at a time when there is an urgent necessity to effect reductions in the public service and in public expenditure. It boils down to agreeing or disagreeing with the motion before the House. One can agree with the status quo that sitting Members can still accept pensions or disagree on grounds of the unfairness of this situation. The public is watching and expecting us as public representatives to act in this situation. I know there are Members on the Government side of the House who firmly believe this practice should be abolished and that serving Members of the Oireachtas should not be paid pensions. I urge those Members, not all of whom are members of the Government parties, to vote with their consciences and as the public would suggest in this matter.