Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)

That highlights the real inequity of this measure. It goes back to the point made by Senator Darragh O'Brien at the start of his contribution - that the levy on the portion of somebody who is a relatively new member, quantum wise, will be small. That is because his fund will be small, unlike somebody who is almost at the end of his working life and who may well have shipped considerable losses in the interim. I note Senator Darragh O'Brien's point on defined benefit or contribution schemes, which means that the quantum of money being taken from those people is considerable. I was not aware of that because I thought the application was on the fund itself and therefore it was down to the fund's ability to fund its ongoing liability.

Seeing that the levy was being individualised, was no consideration given to putting a limit below which the levy would not apply? The Government decided some years back that a €5 million fund should be sufficient to meet the requirements of a reasonable standard of living for retirement. There are many private funds, however, with in excess of that amount. Many people used it for tax deferral reasons. It is not tax avoidance, it is tax deferral because they pay their taxes at the end of the day.

Would the Minister of State not agree that in a situation where funds have been so badly hit because of the economic recession and particularly the investment in bank shares - Irish and foreign banks have all taken a major hit - we need incentives and not deterrents for people to invest in pension funds?