Jim Daly (Cork South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

158. To ask the Minister for Social Protection the measures he has planned to protect persons who have been contributing to a defined benefit pension over their lifetime whose employers are now reneging on and seeking to convert the pension to a defined contribution pension; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5043/17]

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am very much aware of the public concern highlighted by the recent publicity surrounding defined benefit schemes.

The provision of occupational pensions in this country is on a voluntary basis and depends on the willingness of employers to contribute to, and maintain schemes for their employees. Traditionally, many such schemes were organised on a defined benefit basis. However, in recent decades defined benefit provision has been under pressure because of volatility in the stock markets and increasing liabilities arising from demographic pressures, low interest rates, and regulatory requirements. Accountancy standards, which make pensions liabilities very apparent on a company's balance sheet, also contribute to the pressures under which defined benefit schemes are operating. During the financial crisis the decline of defined benefit pension schemes accelerated to the extent that the whole pension sector was possibly at risk.

As a consequence of all these factors, the movement from defined benefit to defined contribution schemes has become a feature of the pensions landscape, even in cases where firms are very profitable.

Almost all defined benefit schemes have a rule that allows the employer to cease contributions, usually after a notice period. There is no legislative obligation on the employer to make contributions and no further liability on the employer where contributions cease. Where changes to these schemes are being sought by employers, I am strongly of the opinion that they should first engage in discussions with the trustees and employee representatives. The introduction of a debt on employer would raise a range of issues including possible negative consequences for defined benefit schemes, some of which may not be beneficial for members.

Neither the Minister for Social Protection nor the Pensions Authority has the power under legislation to intervene to freeze the winding-up of a scheme or to compel the employer to make contributions to a scheme. However, over the last number of years the Government has amended pension legislation to protect the pension sector and to ensure fairer and more equitable outcomes for all scheme members. These changes make more resources of the scheme available in the initial distribution of assets to active and deferred scheme members.

At this stage, further regulation may only serve to add to the pressures on defined provision and could be counterproductive.

While there are strong arguments for the introduction of greater employer obligations, it is also the case that doing so now could result in certain less desirable side effects. These could include prompting well-funded schemes to wind up to avoid new obligations; threatening a company’s financial stability; rendering some employers insolvent; and/or giving a competitive advantage to employers who either never provided a pension and/or put defined contribution schemes in place.

While I have no immediate plans at this stage to bring forward amending legislation to enhance the provisions in the Pensions Act in relation to defined benefit schemes I would like to assure the Deputy that my Department and the Pensions Authority are closely monitoring developments in the DB sector and keep the need for legislative change under continuous review.

I hope this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.