Seanad debates

Thursday, 19 July 2012

Public Service Pensions (Single Scheme and Other Provisions) Bill 2011: Committee and Remaining Stages

 

12:00 pm

Photo of Brendan HowlinBrendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)

I am the son a trade unionist. I was brought up in a trade union household. The job of a trade union is to represent its members. Whatever is on offer, it wants to do a better job. It is logical that trade unions want more. Our job is to be fair and balanced and to do a job for the taxpayer. The most important element of any public servant's pension in the future is to say that the pension will be there; that the State will be in a position to pay it, and that we can have certainty about that. That is why we must transform the situation because, as was outlined during the long discussion on Second Stage, the dependency ratio is altering and the capacity of the State to meet extraordinarily heavy bills in the future – 30 and 40 years hence – will be hugely demanding.

We must make these adjustments, which are for everybody. Some will not get an entitlement until the age of 68, because we are pushing out the general retirement age to link into the social welfare retirement age that was passed by the Houses last year, but I am not moving at all on the retirement age for those bodies. To actuarially work out a pension for someone who goes into a job at 22 or 23 and retires at 50 and then is potentially in receipt of a pension for 40 years is a significant contribution for the State to make. While I understand and applaud the rights of trade unionists to make a case for a better regime – of course they should do that – what is on offer is fair and, on balance, it is recognised to be so.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.