Barry Ward (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I accept what has been said about the nature of amendment No. 45 being out of order. In the context of section 66, which amends section 22 of the 2001 Act, and what Senator McDowell has said about the changes that were made previously in relation to judicial pensions, it is also important to note that that decision also caused a flight of sitting judges because of the additional provisions that are required for them in terms of pensions. They left and, in fact, my understanding is that there is a single judge of the superior courts, so between the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, there is just one judge in the same position he was in at that time. There has been a massive change over of personnel in the superior courts since those rules were brought in and I do not think that is accidental. I think the two facts are connected.

Another retrograde step made in that regard was to reduce the retirement age from 72 to 70. The difficulty there is that it flies in the face of what we are doing in other respects. At the same time that people are talking at a European level of increasing the retirement age from 65 to 66, 67 or whatever it is that people are saying, we have reduced the retirement age for judges from 72 to 70. That was done, I think, in 1995 or the mid-1990s but it fails to recognise the fact that people are very well able to work beyond the age of 71. It would have, to some extent, dealt with the issue that Senator McDowell raises because it would have meant 52 rather than 50 years in order to get the full pension.

I recognise that I am running out of road at this stage but it is regrettable that we cannot acknowledge the fact that people in their 70s are well capable of discharging the duties of judges, particularly those who have been in that position for decades. We lose manpower by not doing that. Even if we were to put into place a requirement that from the age of 70 judges renew their mandate every year with the president of the court in question, in case any issue were to arise health-wise or whatever it might be. We should do that and remove the age cap on retirement, full stop. As long as the president of a given court, the Chief Justice or the Minister for Justice, if needs be, has confidence that the person continues to be in a position to discharge his or her duties, we should allow that judge to continue. I think of great judicial figures we have in this country. We have lost people like Ms Justice Mary Laffoy and Ms Justice Mary Finlay Geoghegan, excellent judges who retired at the peak of their powers, in many respects, but had to do so because of the rule that was brought in 1995. I also recognise the amendment is out of order so I will not speak on it.