Seanad debates

Friday, 27 April 2012

Social Welfare and Pensions Bill 2012: Second Stage

 

11:00 am

Photo of Sean BarrettSean Barrett (Independent)

If there are women in the community who would like to mind other people's children in their homes and have the ability to do so, why does child care cost so much in Ireland? I agree with the many Senators who have spoken about child care as an obstacle.

We need a balance in job creation. We hear a great deal about new high-end jobs. That kind of job creation will not make any difference to the 14.5% of people who are unemployed. We have given grant aid to companies that have subsequently found it necessary to import workers from outside this jurisdiction. When the grant-awarding agencies speak about the creation of high-end jobs, I am reminded that the rate of unemployment among graduates is 5%. The rate in the community in general is 14.5%. Could we try to achieve a better balance between attracting jobs and looking after the interests of those who most badly need jobs?

The Minister spoke about defined benefit pension schemes. In the 1950s, it was estimated that people worked for 53 years and retired for 11 years. At a time when we are heading towards a participation rate of 70% in third level education, and given that approximately a third of those born this year are expected to reach their 100th birthday, more contributions into pension funds are required. I am in favour of later retirements as well. We have to look at the conduct of some of the defined benefit schemes. The McCarthy report on the privatisation of State companies found that those companies had net liabilities of €3.4 billion in 2009 and €4.2 billion in 2008. There have been far too many schemes of early retirement and added years, etc. Some of the trustees of pension funds have to be questioned. The previous Government had to take approximately a dozen of those pension schemes into public ownership because the trustees had been dispensing far too much largesse on early retirement schemes. The whole idea underpinning such schemes, which were fashionable not that long ago, seems bizarre at a time when people are living for longer. We have to prepare for that.

The Minister, Deputy Burton, has made a good start. I know she has annoyed some of my colleagues on the opposite side. As part of the package they seek, there has to be some onus on those who leave the family unit to make a contribution afterwards. The burden should not always fall on the taxpayer. Do we have the numbers in this regard? How good are we at securing attachments to the earnings of those - typically men - who depart the family home and renege on their responsibilities to their spouses and children? They have to be part of the solution as well.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.