Is the Tánaiste aware there is a serious and developing crisis in our pensions industry? Is she aware of the catastrophic situation where 600,000 Irish citizens with defined benefit pension schemes are facing virtual pauperisation in their retirement years, despite a lifetime of making pension contributions? Already six out of ten defined benefit schemes have shut down under this Government's watch. Now we have the ignominy of the Melbourne Mercer Global Pensions Index putting Ireland at the bottom of the grading list and ranking it the worst for sustainability of its pension system.

If the Government is aware of the crisis, it has a funny way of showing it. Not only has it done nothing to address this issue, what it has actually done has made the situation worse. Last week, Independent News and Media, INM, unilaterally closed its defined benefit scheme on the back of a €23 million shortfall, despite the fact that this was the company that got a €140 million bailout from the taxpayer. There was no discussion and no alternative provided. It was simply gone. It is the latest solvent employer to shut down a pension scheme because it does not want to foot the bill. There is nothing coming out of this House to put a stop to this type of behaviour.

Earlier in the year, we had the appalling example of the Central Remedial Clinic, CRC, unilaterally shutting down its scheme on foot of a €2 million deficit, a tiny amount when lined up against its assets. To add insult to injury, €2 million is coincidentally the same amount that will be paid from these workers' pension pot to Mercer and all the other advisers involved in that scheme. This is because the Government put wind-up costs higher than members' benefits.

The same professional experts, who play all sides of the house, advising the trustees and acting as actuaries will now get money from a wind-up and bringing people into a new defined contribution, DC, scheme and money from administering those schemes. One could not make this up.

The Irish airline superannuation scheme, IASS, also has the same advisers. They set up a very peculiar and unique funding arrangement. I do not know if the Tánaiste knows but a new bombshell trustee report has emerged on the IASS. After years of all the so-called professional advice and a year in operation, this scheme is now in trouble. Hidden in his report, the actuary stated he is no longer confident the scheme will meet the funding standard. Normally, he stated in the report, that should be brought to the attention of the Pensions Authority which should be required to intervene and take action. No action is being taken in this case, however.

When is the Government going to wake up and realise we have a crisis in pensions? What action will it take to examine the cabal at the top of the pensions industry? The same organisations, IPT, Mercer and Irish Life, appear on all sides of the fence in this arrangement while pensioners' living standards are being utterly decimated and the Government sits on its hands.

On the final point the Deputy made, we have a financial services regulator who can deal with the claims she has just made. She outlined several individual schemes where there are problems. I will revert to her on those individual schemes.

On the broader point, in the Government's approach to the Lansdowne Road agreement and the unwinding of the financial emergency measures in the public interest, FEMPI, legislation, the pensions situation will also be addressed. The Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Varadkar, and the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Donohoe, are both examining these issues. The Minister for Social Protection has made it clear that we know there are problems and we are concerned about the deficits which have emerged. Careful planning will be needed to deal with this issue as we go forward.

Given the improvements in the economy, which are continuing as we see from the latest employment figures, we are obviously in a better position to deal with some of the issues highlighted by the Deputy than if we were still facing a situation where we had the kind of problems we had some years ago. The pensions issue is a central one and of significant concern to individuals and organisations. We are conscious of that. In the unwinding of FEMPI, that will be part of the negotiations. We are approaching the whole issue of public sector pay by a process of negotiation and discussions. That is how we will have to address the pensions issue also.

I am not sure if the Tánaiste understood the question or realised the points I specifically made with regard to particular problems with defined benefit pension schemes or my very firm claim that blatant mismanagement of the schemes is under way on a vast scale. It is not just in the companies I mentioned but in many more at the expense of citizens and pensioners. While it may be the case on paper that we have regulation, a Pensions Authority and so on, the point I am trying to make is that this regulation is wholly inadequate.

It is not that there is a crisis in funding. I gave an example to the Tánaiste's colleague, the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Varadkar, several weeks ago of a supplementary pension scheme in Aer Lingus where €200 million has sat in cash for two years in a pension scheme. A decision was made to close it but it has not been wound up. People have retired and could be the beneficiaries of that money but they are being denied access to it. Meanwhile, the trustees, advisers, administrators and the management fees are all feeding off the pot which is getting smaller and smaller.

The same names appear across all of the trustees and across the industry. There needs to be an inquiry into this. When are we going to the beef up pensions regulation? When I put that to the Minister for Social Protection, he put me in touch with a very nice man from the pensions section of his Department. He eventually came back to me and said it is very bad form but they are not doing anything illegal. The law needs to be changed.

The points the Deputy made are extremely serious. I acknowledge the impact on individuals and their income after retirement. I also acknowledge the serious consequences of these issues if not dealt with. Clearly, she has raised this with the line Ministers, Deputy Varadkar and Deputy Donohoe. If further legislation is needed, I have no doubt it will be examined. I will ask both Ministers for a response to the particular schemes she has raised and the points she has made about them.

On the broader issue of whether stronger legislation is needed, I am sure if it is needed, it will be considered. I will revert to her on whether any legislation is planned. It seems clear from the Deputy's supplementary, the Minister for Social Protection arranged for further discussions and input from his Department on this issue. I will advise him that she would like further contact.