Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

On the question of pre-1995 public servants, quite a lot of women re-enter the system. That is a common situation which has arisen whereby people have come back into the system, perhaps after a period of ten or 20 years raising children. It is also the case that many women, having left, return to work in their late 40s or 50s. During the recession, a number of women who were not working but who had previously been public servants up to 25 years ago re-entered the workplace. Such a situation might be more common that one might think. What we find here is that they are playing catch-up. The issue we addressed in the context of voluntary contributions and the question of averaging, which will be addressed in a later amendment, are two aspects that come into play in terms of those women who re-entered the workplace post-1995 and might be supported in building up their contributions records or having records which allow them to obtain adequate or appropriate incomes. I appreciate the detailed and thoughtful response from the Minister and look forward to engaging with him further on the matter.

The Minister is correct in respect of the question of the occupational pension gap being wider. However, the marriage bar also had an impact in the context of occupational pensions. While it related to public service, the marriage bar also involved the setting of a convention across society. This convention was mirrored widely in the private sector as well because it represented a strong signal from Government that women who were married should not have been in the workplace or given access to the same routes of progression as men. A significant number of issues arise, including those relating to progression in the workplace, such as who progresses, who is making contributions, etc.

This is a complex issue, it is not simply about gender. There is a requirement in the programme for Government on gender proofing and while the Minister wants to look at the issues in the round and seek a general outcome, a gender analysis is essential. Such an analysis would be useful and would make the Department's systems work for all the population. In broad terms, half of the members of the population feel strongly that they have been ill served by the system. I suggest that the Minister ensure that a gender analysis is carried out and that we do not merely focus on outcomes for men and women. He should consider teasing out some of the issues to which I refer. There is good research that will assist in this regard.

I will not deal with of the other points. There is a 37% gender pension gap. I understand that is across the second tier - and even the third tier, as well as the first tier - but it is significant. It is an anomalous gap which, if it was in any other area of society, would be of concern.

I appreciate that the Minister indicated that he is interested in examining the issue relating to home-makers. That matter is dealt with in the context of a later amendment.

I thank the Minister. I will not press the amendment at this point. I look forward to further engagement on the matter instead and I reserve the right to resubmit the amendment on Report Stage.