Articles 41.2.1° and 41.2.2° of the Constitution state, "In particular, the State recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved" and "The State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home." While the homemaker's scheme introduced in 1994 went a long way to increase the rights of homemakers by making it easier for them to qualify for a contributory State pension, they are still a generation of women who have been forgotten about. A group of women is in limbo and has been actively discriminated against by the introduction of the homemaker's scheme.

The scheme only goes back to 1994, which precludes women who worked in the home prior to this date from benefitting from the scheme. Some women were discriminated against in the past when forced to give up their jobs in the late 1960s and early 1970s because of the marriage bar. Subsequently, other women chose to give up their jobs and remain at home to rear children or care for a sick child or relative. They are discriminated against because they are not included in the current homemaker's scheme which is only applicable from 1994. The scheme recognises women who choose to leave the workforce for a period not greater than 20 years to care for children or a sick child or relative. I urge the Taoiseach and the Minister for Social Protection to apply the same scheme retrospectively from 1970.

The women precluded from the scheme are either on reduced pensions or do not have enough contributions to qualify for a full rate, or are receiving a pension as a qualified adult which is related to their husband's pension. This is not a payment in their own right. The payment is means-tested and some women struggle with the concept of continuing to be dependent on their husbands in retirement. They feel their contribution to society is not being recognised. It is very unfair and results in a loss of dignity.

These women are being discriminated against deliberately, but in terms of their pensions it is discrimination on two grounds, namely gender and age. Can the Taoiseach tell me that the homemaker's scheme will be backdated to 1970?

The cost of increasing pensions for those currently not eligible prior to 1994 would be about €300 million. If that money was allocated, one would probably not have any money to increase pensions as a consequence. The Minister for Social Production has examined the way in which contributory pensions are calculated. The Oireachtas Joint Committee on Social Protection will be in receipt of a suite of options which will be presented for its consideration in the next couple of months.

Deputy Collins read out two articles from the Constitution as it was written. There have been increased opportunities for women in the home who want to participate in the labour force due to increased employment levels and many other methods. The point the Deputy has raised is an issue. There is a cost attached to it and I suggest that he wait until all of the options presented to the Joint Committee on Social Production in the coming months for discussion by Deputies have been considered.

I thank the Taoiseach for his reply. He referred to the huge cost increase this would represent, but that is to fail to take into account the value of the women who stayed at home during those years. I urge him to address this anomaly immediately. In 1970 and before, women chose to remain at home to raise children or care for elderly parents. We know the contribution they made to the community and I want it to be recognised. This could be done simply and without huge cost to the State by recognising the years spent out of work and granting the women concerned eligibility for a pension in retirement. This society recognises equality attempts to gender-proof legislation and avoid situations which give rise to discrimination. This is one area that must be addressed. I ask the Government to examine the matter and address it without delay.

It is all about choices because one does not have the resources to do everything that might be desirable. While this is a desirable option, it would cost €300 million to go back to 1970. If that is done, there will be no capacity to increase pensions, lone-parent allowances or other measures. There is no endless pit of money, which is why all of the actuarial assessments and different options are being prepared for consideration and will be brought before the committee in a couple of months. It is a choice. If we do what the Deputy suggests, while desirable, it will implicitly suggest we will not have any money to increase pensions or a range of other allowances that would be catered to in the normal course. As such, it is important to lay out the facts before priorities are assessed and decisions made.