Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

185. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if the 1984 Civil Service superannuation scheme constitutes discriminatory treatment for disabled civil servants according to the 2002 Institute of Public Administration report (details supplied); if consideration will be given to refunding contributions to officers who retire single; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [35085/19]

Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Civil Service Spouses’ and Children’s Contributory Pension Scheme provides pensions to the spouse and children of members who die in service, or after they have qualified for pension (or preserved pension). Membership of the Scheme was made compulsory for male established civil servants appointed on or after 1 January 1969 and for female established civil servants appointed on or after 1 June 1981. Officers serving prior to the relevant dates were given options to join.

Following discussions with staff interests, a ‘revised’ scheme was introduced in 1984 which provides for a wider range of beneficiaries than under the 'original' scheme. In order to meet the additional costs of the wider definition of beneficiaries, the contribution refund arrangements were made more restrictive than in the original scheme. The revised scheme was made compulsory for all civil servants joining after 1 September 1984, while serving staff, including those who were members of the original scheme, had the option to join.

Regarding the Spouses’ and Children’s Schemes contribution arrangements, I am in agreement with the Commission on Public Service Pensions, which found in its Final Report (2000) that the schemes are structured on a group insurance basis and that member contribution rates take account of the fact that payment of benefits will not arise in respect of all members; accordingly, the Commission did not recommend any change in the refund arrangements for membership contributions.

I have no proposals to amend the revised scheme rules to provide for a refund of contributions where a member is single on retirement, including in the context raised by the Deputy. I am satisfied that the Revised Civil Service Spouses' and Children's Contributory Pension Scheme meets the requirements of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 – 2015 in relation to all of the grounds of discrimination set out in the legislation, including on grounds of disability.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

186. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the extent to which a pension for a person (details supplied) will be restored; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [35114/19]

Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is not possible to provide a precise response to the Deputy’s question.  Based on the information provided, the situation potentially involves a number of measures to which different rules and policies apply.

Insofar as the potentially relevant measures may apply, the position is as follows:

1. In general, a person employed in the public service in the period in question would have been subject to the pension related deduction (PRD), a deduction from the taxable remuneration of public servants with an entitlement to, or in receipt of, a public service pension.  PRD refunds only apply where an individual had no public service pension benefit in the current or any previous public service employment.  If the person to whom the question relates was employed in a pensionable capacity or had an entitlement to a public service pension benefit from any public service employment, he would be subject to PRD in accordance with the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Act 2009.  In such circumstances, partial refunds might arise where the individual had not reached relevant thresholds.  The individual’s main public service employer is responsible for making such refunds.

2. If that person had an entitlement to a separate public service pension, the pension in payment may have been considered for abatement in accordance with the Pensions Abatement Act 1965. 

3. Finally any pensions in payment would have been subject to the public service pension reduction (PSPR), a reduction applicable to public service pensions in accordance with the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Act 2010.

In the circumstances, I would suggest that, in the first instance, the individual should seek a more detailed explanation from their employer as to the reason for the deduction applied in this case.