Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 429: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the situation in relation to widows and widowers pension and the view of same that widows with their own contribution record should get two pensions, namely their own and survivors since they have their own record and the pensions are separately based; if he will make a statement on the issue in view of the increasing number of people whose partners have their own contribution record. [17769/07]

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The social welfare system is based on income replacement with entitlement related to defined contingencies such as sickness, unemployment, old age and widowhood. Social welfare legislation provides that, with some exceptions, only one social welfare payment is payable at the one time. This approach is common to most social security systems across the world and is intended to ensure that resources are applied to the best advantage in meeting the income needs of people who experience the contingencies covered.

There are three main principles which underlie the operation of the PRSI system. As already indicated, generally, only one income support payment may be paid at the same time. Secondly, the contributory principle requires that those qualifying for benefits demonstrate an ongoing and adequate attachment to the social insurance system. Finally, there is the principle of solidarity whereby contributions paid by insured persons are not actuarially linked to benefits at the individual level, but can be redistributed to support other contributors.

In general, qualification for social insurance benefits is based on a person's own contribution record. The widow/er's contributory pension is unique in this regard in that either a personal record or that of a late spouse can be used to qualify. This, combined with a contribution condition which can be satisfied with as little as 3 years contributions, was designed to make qualification for pension achievable and, given the nature of the contingency in question, relatively easy for the majority of widowed people. It was not the intention that these qualifying conditions should be used to allow for the payment of more than one pension.

Noel Ahern (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 430: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the situation in relation to age of eligibility for retirement age pensions; when retirement ages for men and women were co-ordinated; the rules up to that time; if there have been any campaigns or demands since for separate age limits; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17775/07]

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Social welfare pension schemes have always featured a standard qualifying age for men and women, currently 65 or 66 years of age depending on the scheme. The position in relation to private and occupational schemes is different in that the normal retirement age for each scheme depends on the rules of the individual scheme. Historically, many such schemes provided for different retirement ages for men and women, often 65 and 60 respectively. However, following an EU judgement in 1990 (generally known as the Barber case) schemes had to change their rules to ensure compliance with the principle of equal treatment , as provided for in Part VII of the Pensions Act, 1990.

Part VII of the Pensions Act, prohibits employers from treating persons differently in relation to the normal retirement age for members of a scheme. Where there is inequality, any discriminatory rule is null and void , and must be addressed by providing the more favourable treatment to all affected members until such time as the scheme rules are changed to comply with the principle of equal treatment.

I am not aware of any demand for changes in the way equal treatment principles are applied in relation to retirement ages. Different treatment for men and women in this regard would be contrary to the Pensions Act and, indeed, equality legislation generally.