Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 81: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the implications for the proposals contained in the Programme for Government to cut PRSI contribution rates of the findings of the recently published 2nd Actuarial Review of the Social Insurance Fund. [25885/07]

Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 82: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the way he will fund the commitments set out in the Programme for Government on State contributory pension and other contributory schemes in view of the projected deficit in the Social Insurance Fund by 2011. [26269/07]

Martin Ferris (Kerry North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 89: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs his views on the publication of the latest actuarial review of the Social Insurance Fund. [25887/07]

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 95: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs his views on the findings of the latest actuarial review of the Social Insurance Fund which found that while total income to the fund is projected to equal or exceed benefit outgo up to 2010 thereafter the fund's net cash flow position is projected to decline rapidly. [25884/07]

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 111: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when his Department received the latest actuarial review of the Social Insurance Fund. [25889/07]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 81, 82, 89, 95 and 111 together.

The second Actuarial Review of the Social Insurance Fund, which was required under Section 10 of the Social Welfare (Consolidation) Act, 2005, was received by my Department on the 8th of June, 2007, following its completion by Mercer Human Resources Consulting, and was approved for publication at the Cabinet meeting of July 18th. It was decided that it would be appropriate to publish the Actuarial Review in due course in conjunction with the Green Paper on Pensions and both were published on 17 October 2007.

The focus of the Review, which covers the period from 2006 to 2061, is the income of the Social Insurance Fund including the accumulated surplus, the contributory pensions and benefits paid from the Fund, including associated non-cash benefits, and other payments. The report examines matters from a number of different aspects in the context of surpluses or deficits, whether benefit payments are up-rated to prices or earnings, and as a percentage of GNP. It also projects the number of years that existing reserves can be used to keep contributions rates below break-even rates. The report also examines the impact of number of potential enhancements to social insurance coverage into the future and the extent to which the Fund is redistributive through examining value for money in notional cases.

The findings of the Review include:

That the Fund will move from being in surplus to running a deficit in 2009;

That on foot of the annual deficits from 2009, the accumulated surplus will be exhausted by 2016;

That the ratio of people of working age to people over pension age, or pensioner support ratio is projected to fall from 5.6 to 1.81 over the period to 2061.

In the short-term, the Fund has sufficient resources to provide for the changes to the PRSI system and the increases in benefits committed to in the Programme for Government. Obviously, however, decreasing contributions whilst also increasing benefits will bring forward the time when exchequer subvention will be required.

In this context it should be noted that legislation provides that the Exchequer is the residual financier of the Fund and Exchequer contributions to cover shortfalls in contributions were the norm for over forty years. Any shortfall in the cost of benefits paid would, in the normal way, be addressed by Exchequer subvention. Other approaches to such an annual deficit would be a matter for the Government to consider in a future budgetary context.