Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

68. To ask the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport if steps can be taken to enhance the CIÉ 1951 pension scheme which has not paid out an increase for the past sixteen years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39206/24]

Eamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

From the outset I would like to clarify that I, as Minister for Transport, have responsibility for policy and overall funding in relation to public transport. Issues in relation to CIÉ pension schemes are primarily a matter for the trustees of the pension schemes, the CIÉ, Group and their employees.

Concerning increases for 1951 Scheme pensioners, it is understood that an increase for pensioners would only be possible when the Scheme is capable of sustaining such increases. CIÉ are actively engaging with the Department to give effect to labour court recommendations for the 1951 Scheme, as passed by a ballot of trade union members in May 2021, in order, and minimise risk and liability to the 1951 Scheme. Further, changes are required to bring the scheme into compliance with the IORP II EU Directive, transposed into Irish law in 2021, of which the scheme is currently non-compliant.

For the first time in many years the 1951 Scheme now meets the Pensions Authority’s Minimum Funding Standard (MFS), but the scheme deficit remains significant. The MFS indicates the scheme’s ability to ‘wind-up’ as it currently stands, as opposed to its ability to fund an increase in pension benefits. The CIÉ Board has been advised by the Scheme Actuary that the current MFS position does not create sufficient headroom to grant pension increases at this time, as such a move would put the Scheme at risk of having a deficit on an MFS basis again. In line with industry norms, and in order to achieve stability and security for all members, a MFS funding level (including the Risk Reserve) of materially in excess of 100% is required to give the Scheme sufficient resources to withstand the investment losses that could result from investment market falls.

Any proposal to increase pension benefits would be dependent on the advice of the Scheme Actuary at the time an increase is proposed and must be done in agreement with the Trustees of the Schemes. Awarding discretionary pension increases remains a goal of the CIÉ Group, but it is not envisaged that any such increases can be awarded from the Scheme in the near term.

Accordingly, I have forwarded the Deputy's question to CIÉ for direct reply. Please advise my private office if you do not receive a reply within ten working days.