Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

We can expect a report in respect of the 2012 changes then.

There is also an underlying anomaly in how we calculate our pensions which needs to be addressed, and I hope there is scope to do so. I have some concerns. Yesterday in this House we heard about the move to the new supplementary pension system, about which the Minister has spoken previously. I refer to the new auto-enrolment pension system. The concern is that we have also been hearing that the total contribution approach is going to be brought in by 2020. We have heard that the total contribution approach had the potential to address some of the concerns about our unfair averaging system. That said, I recognise that there are still concerns, namely, recognition of care and how best to operate a care credit, which the total contribution approach would need to factor in. In other words, how do we include and reflect care in the total contribution approach? I would also note that in the auto-enrolment system, how we recognise and support care is also going to be an issue, if we are to ensure that we do not have yet another gender pension gap in that system further down the line.

My concern is this. As we move towards the new auto-enrolment system, what is happening around the move to the total contribution approach? If we are not going to deliver that by 2020, or even if we are, we still must do something to address the basic inequality in our averaging system. It is an inequality on an inequality. The first of these is the inequality caused by women being pushed out by the marriage bar. As I said yesterday, I believe that in 1973, when we were told that the marriage bar was not acceptable, we should have put pensions systems in place to address the impact it had had since it had been noted as being inequitable. We did not do this.

On top of the first insult arising from issues like the marriage bar, there is the ongoing tendency to deeply penalise anybody who takes a period out for caring. That occurs even if they have made the same amount of contributions as somebody else over their lifetime. It is an unacceptable inequality and it is not something we can stand over, especially as a Government that has committed to gender and equality proofing our budget.

This is why it sits with the Minister, but it also sits with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, and I have highlighted this. That Department is responsible for the implementation of the legislation for public duty around equality and human rights proofing. It is also fundamentally responsible for the gender and equality proofing of our budget every year. I cannot see how this stands up. I do not know how it slipped through another year. It is like a glaring black mark on any future report we produce on equality.

In that regard, I suggest that the solution to this anomaly should not simply be sought using the resources allocated to the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection, because the solution will need a wider scope. I have discussed this before with the Minister. We spend €2.6 billion on private pension tax relief in this country. In many cases I am sure it is important and it has many merits. When we debated this during the Finance Bill 2017, many people spoke about the various merits and the encouragement it provides. Nonetheless, there are a lot of problems with how it is done.

There is another inequality, and it seems inequalities are piling up, namely, we award private pension tax relief at a marginal rate. As such, many in the country who are on a low income have the not very incentivising tax relief of 20%, whereas those who are looking to be on higher incomes have a much more incentivising 40%. When this was discussed before, what I sought from the Department was something that was in fact recommended in the memorandum of understanding with the troika, namely, that we should move to a standard rate of perhaps 30%, which every citizen seeking a pension and a private pension could access. This would deliver adequate savings, I hope, to at least partially address the gaps that we have seen here. I ask that we consider addressing an inequality so that we can address an inequality. That is what I am putting forward as a proposal. I look forward to the Minister's response.