Ruth Coppinger (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

15. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform in view of the approval of the marriage equality referendum, if he will revise the arrangements for the spouses and children's superannuation scheme for civil servants who opted not to avail of the scheme prior to August 1984 in view of the circumstances lesbian, gay and transgender persons faced at the time but have subsequently entered civil partnerships or plan to marry; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26380/15]

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

At the outset, I wish to make clear that neither persons in civil partnerships or those who will enter into same sex marriages in the future are discriminated under any aspect of the public service pension schemes. This view has been upheld in a recent Equality Tribunal hearing on this very subject in relation to a civil partnership.

The public service operates a Spouses' and Children's Contributory Pension Scheme.  This provides benefits to Spouses or Children of deceased members. In summary, when a member dies after retirement, a spouse's pension of one-half of the former member's pension is payable.  Dependent children are also entitled to a child's pension of one-third of the spouse's pension for each of the first three eligible children.

The original pre-1984 scheme, which was optional, did not allow for the payment of a pension to a spouse who married or had children post retirement.  Thus, the scheme allowed a refund of contributions if the individual had not been married up to the point of retirement.

In 1984, a revised Scheme which extended eligibility for benefits to spouses who married or had children after retirement was introduced and membership was compulsory for all new appointees after that date. Members of the original scheme, certain retirees and those who had not joined the original scheme were given the option of transferring to the revised Scheme.

One of the benefits of the Revised Scheme was that the spouse of a post retirement marriage was eligible for a spouse's pension. The disadvantage of the Scheme was that there was no facility for repayment of contributions on retirement if the individual concerned did not have a spouse and would not therefore be in a position to avail of any benefit under the Scheme. 

For members who remained in the original Scheme there was an entitlement to claim a refund of contributions in the event that the member remained unmarried at the date of retirement.  Many members of the scheme availed of this option and received a refund.

Across the entire public service, approximately 30,000 staff who were not members and an unquantified number who had been members of the original scheme opted not to join the new scheme.  Their reasons for doing so were presumably varied, including not expecting to get married, being in a relationship with a separated person who was not then able to divorce or that it was personally more beneficial to them not to join the scheme.  For example, prior to 1984 women were not required to join the pension scheme and pay contributions; some of those in the older scheme may have decided that continuing that arrangement was better financially for them. 

In recent years, some individuals have sought to reverse the decision they made at that point and have sought a new opt-in. More specifically, a number of people have argued that they could not have envisaged that same-sex civil partnerships would be legalised in the state.

A fundamental element of any new opt-in would have to be that it would have be open to all applicants regardless of their reasons for not opting-in in the first place.  This would be required so as to avoid alternative claims of discrimination.  Every then serving and retired public servant who opted to remain in the old scheme or chose not to join either scheme would have to be given the opportunity to opt into the new scheme. 

Public service spouses' and children's schemes are structured on a group insurance basis and the member contribution rates take account of the fact that payment of benefits will not arise in respect of all members.  Given the passage of time since 1984 and the greater clarity those who opted out then will now have about their lives, it is eminently foreseeable that only those persons whose partners would benefit would opt in.  This would radically undermine the group insurance basis of the scheme. 

This Department's position has always been that if decisions freely made about pensions or other matters could be reversed at any time this would have grave consequences for public administration.  Where changes have been made to pension schemes, individuals have only been allowed to opt in to the new arrangements at the time of the introduction of the new scheme.  This approach is in line with that of the Commission on Public Service Pensions.