Review of ministerial pension arrangements
Boland says office-holder salary levels were reduced to account for eligibility for ministerial pensions, citing the Devlin Review Body. Mac Giolla argues that pension eligibility is disproportionate to service and urges a prompt review; the Chair moves on.
As the Chair pointed out, that is a separate matter. I should mention that when the Devlin Review Body were conducting an investigation into the appropriate salary levels applicable to the Members of the House and office holders, they stated in their 1979 report that they had set the levels applicable on the basis of the conditions of office and they had made a reduction in the amount of salaries payable to office holders generally because they qualified for this payment after a period in office. Consequently, it should be taken into account that the levels payable to office holders take account, on the basis of the review body's report, of the benefits of the allowances paid after a number of years.
Comment on this
Does the Minister not agree that a Deputy could come into this House and after three or four years in a ministerial post, get a ministerial pension while other Deputies have to be 15 or 20 years here before they get a pension. The pension granted bears no relation to the amount of time a Deputy serves in this House. Would the Minister not agree that the whole system should be reviewed as soon as possible?