Richard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 184: To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance the estimated cost of providing pension cover at Principal Officer, Assistant Secretary and Secretary General levels in terms of the contribution required as a percentage of salary to fund such a pension. [30026/07]

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The annual contribution required as a percentage of salary to notionally fund pension benefits is Principal officer, 29%; Assistant Secretary, 32%; and Secretary General, 38%. These figures show the estimated total cost of notionally funding the benefits for each grade. These costs are before any allowance is made for employee contributions which, on average, amount to approximately 5% of pay for those to whom a personal pension contribution applies. Certain categories, such as civil servants recruited prior to 6 April 1995, do not make such a contribution and their salary scales are correspondingly lower by 5%. The figures depend on the assumptions used. In the case of Assistant Secretary and Secretary General, the assumptions generally follow those used in the recent Report of the Review Body on Higher Remuneration in the Public Sector. For example, the same discount rates and mortality assumptions used by the Review Body were used. In particular, the costs relate to the benefits which accrue during the period a person serves in each of the above grades; this approach follows that adopted by the Review Body. The pay of grades below Assistant Secretary, including Principal, is being examined by the Public Service Benchmarking Body and the cost of their superannuation terms are being considered in that context. The Benchmarking Body is due to report around the end of the year. The Review Body advisors carried out an analysis of the cost of standard public service terms for those covered by its remit and the cost of the pension terms for a comparable employee in the private sector. On the basis of this, the Review Body concluded that it should discount by 15% the rates it was recommending for public service posts, to take account of the greater value of the public service terms (see Chapter 3 of Report No 42 of the Review Body on Higher Remuneration in the Public Sector).