I wish to raise the issue of pension discrimination against up to 35,000 pensioners in Ireland, the vast majority of whom - in excess of 23,000 - are women. The Tánaiste will recall that back in 2012 the then Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Burton, introduced the averaging rule in respect of the calculation of a person's entitlement to the State pension. Yesterday, the Minister for Finance, Deputy Donohoe, participated in the annual phone-in radio programme with Seán O'Rourke on RTÉ and it was quite revealing. He was challenged by a caller from County Longford who outlined his wife's situation. She had entered the work force as a student and then taken a number of years out to be a homemaker and to raise her family. She had also been disbarred from working in the Civil Service because of the State ban on married female civil servants. She is now being financially discriminated against and disadvantaged to the tune of €35 per week, which amounts to almost €1,800 per annum. She is not even entitled to the increase which was announced in the budget. When challenged, the Minister's reply was that he found the situation to be bonkers and unbelievable.

To say that people are outraged at this, as well as at the Minister's reaction and comment, would be an understatement. It is inconceivable that the Minister for Finance would react like that without having anything substantial to offer these people who are being blatantly discriminated against by the State. It is a shameful indictment of the decision made by the Government of the day, to which the Tánaiste, her colleagues and the Labour Party were party.

As a former leading light in the National Women's Council of Ireland, the Tánaiste will have heard its comments and how it has been campaigning and reacting in this regard. Age Action Ireland also lobbied Oireachtas Members on a number of fronts in advance of the budget. My own party, other parties and individual Deputies have been raising this issue in recent years. Apart from platitudes and soundbites from the Minister, such as those he gave yesterday during his interview with Sean O'Rourke when challenged quite succinctly, what exactly do the Tánaiste and the Government intend to do to address this blatant inequality? It is gender-based inequality in the main because it impacts on women, as I have said. It must be borne in mind that many women took time out of the workforce to rear their families, to look after sick relatives or elderly parents and to look after their homemaking responsibilities. Will the Tánaiste outline the Government's intentions for the many thousands of pensioners who are being discriminated against in this fashion, and the women in particular?

In his comments yesterday, the Minister was referring to the marriage bar and the impact it had. It is almost impossible to believe that was in place up until the 1970s. I am acutely conscious of the problems women are experiencing in accessing adequate pension provision. We had extensive discussion on this as we formulated the National Strategy for Women and Girls 2017-2020, which I published in May of this year. The actions in that strategy include increasing women's access to pensions in their own right, improving their access to private and occupational pensions and assessing the impact any future reforms to pension policy in this area will have on women and taking actions if appropriate. That has been accepted by the Government in the national strategy in respect of dealing with this issue. In line with the national strategy the Minister, Deputy Flanagan, and I also launched a public consultation on tackling the gender pay gap in August. We need to drive a whole-of-Government agenda to deal with these gender pay issues, including the pension issue, female entrepreneurship, child care, skills, STEM subjects and so on.

This is clearly a complex issue. Of course we do not want to see gender discrimination in our pension provisions. It is a complex issue to resolve in the sense that we do not want to create any new anomalies which would discriminate against people who have a contribution history. The current rate plans applying to the contributory State pension were introduced with effect from September 2012 and reduced the previous rates which had been introduced in 2000.

These rate bands now reflect the social insurance contributions history of a person more closely than those that were in place between 2000 and 2012. It is estimated that to revert to the previous bands from January 2018 would result in a cost of more than €60 million in 2018, which would increase by an estimated €10 million in each following year. It would be expected to cost some €70 million in 2019. Spending this money on reverting to the old rates would not generally benefit the worst-off pensioners who are dependent upon the State pension. This is because the main beneficiaries would be those who have other income means such that they do not qualify for a non-contributory pension, which is 95% of the contributory pension. Given that the funds would come from the general pension provision, less well-off pensioners could expect to be worse off if such a course were taken.

The savings created by the new rate bands were an alternative to cutting the core rate of pensions at a time when Exchequer savings were required and other social protection payments were being reduced across the board. Had a similar approach been taken with pensions, affecting everyone over State pension age regardless of their means or their contribution record, the hardest hit would have been pensioners with no additional income, notably those paid a non-contributory State pension and widows and widowers living alone. A significantly higher portion of such pensioners are women and this approach would have been expected to result in more women over 65 experiencing difficulties in terms of income.

It is a complex issue and to resolve it is between €200 million and €300 million overall. We do not want to see gender discrimination and the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection is having ongoing discussions with the Minister for Finance.

It is just not good enough for the Tánaiste to come in here and say that this is a complex issue. What is basically happening is that women in the main and some men are being blatantly discriminated against because they were not in the workforce for a number of years. That is not complex. The years they were not in the workforce are being used to average down their contributions. There is nothing complex about that. It is just pure discrimination. It has got to be fixed. Is the Tánaiste happy for this to pertain indefinitely into the future? Has the Government got a realistic plan?

When my colleague, Deputy O'Dea, who is our spokesperson on this area, questioned the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection earlier this month, he was pointed towards an exercise of total contribution approach. That is not going to solve anything in the short term. I want to get from the Tánaiste a sense as to whether this issue will be addressed. Can she at least commit to addressing it incrementally? She indicated that it may cost up to €60 million, a sum which she then revised upwards to €240 million. How much is it going to cost? It is simply not fair to be discriminating against people who took time out, bearing in mind that the State forced many of them to do so because they were in the civil and public services.

I have said to the Deputy that any gender-based discrimination is unacceptable in terms of any of our policies and approaches. This is a serious issue for women who took time out. Some women are suffering every year in their pensions because of this. We are all very familiar with the individual cases. What I am pointing out is that to resolve this anomaly, I am informed that an overall sum of €200 million to €300 million would be involved. I have stated that the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection has had discussions with the Minister for Finance. Clearly that is a huge sum of money to be found in the current context. I have no doubt those discussions will continue to see precisely what remedies can be put in place.

We do not want to create further anomalies. I am informed that some of the changes could put other groups at risk. On contribution history, for example, if one disregarded the contributions and moved towards a more universal payment, one would risk that the contributions people had actually made were not resulting in them getting a commensurate pension. We do not want to create that situation either.

A number of Members are indicating that they want their name on the list for promised legislation but there is no promised legislation today, as the House agreed yesterday. I call Deputy McDonald.

Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle. I also want to raise the way in which budget 2018 perpetuates the discrimination faced by many, but particularly by women, when it comes to the State pension. As has been said, 35,000 people have been left with a lesser pension payment than they would have received had they retired before 2012. As the Tánaiste knows, this is the result of measures introduced by the Fine Gael-Labour Party Government, which changed eligibility criteria. Deputy Burton's decision made it more difficult for those without an unbroken, full-time, long-term work history to qualify for the maximum payment. The changes to the bands in addition to the averaging rule regarding PRSI contributions were completely unfair and have had an absolutely disproportionate impact on women, many of whom left the workforce to raise children or to care for their families. Some people are down by as much as €30 a week and, astonishingly, almost 25% of women on a State pension are losing out to this extent.

Some talk about this situation as though it were a mistake, oversight or oddity but it was not an oversight. The 2012 changes were implemented in the full knowledge of their impact on women. It was not a mistake. The Government knew it was going to put thousands of women in this position. It was a conscious decision. The current Government continues to make decisions against the welfare of these women. The Minister, Deputy Donohoe, has described the situation as bonkers and unbelievable. What is really bonkers and unbelievable is that he drafted and announced a budget on Tuesday that does absolutely nothing to rectify this matter. I suppose that comes as no surprise. This Government and its friends in Fianna Fáil have form in preventing a just rectification of this problem. The Tánaiste may recall that last December, Sinn Féin put forward a motion to try to address this issue. We attempted to address the pension inequality against women by reversing the changes introduced by Deputy Burton in 2012. I remind Members that the motion was rejected by Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil.

Sinn Féin did not support our amendment.

In our alternative budget, which is a balanced budget, Sinn Féin provides for the funding to reverse the 2012 changes, which so viciously discriminate against women. The Government could have made that choice too but it refused. It chose not to do right by the women affected. Doling out tea and sympathy does not cut it. Fine Gael is in government to bring forward solutions and resolutions. Notwithstanding strategies on women, the long-term view and the Tánaiste's personal views on gender discrimination, I want to know what she is going to do in the here and now to reverse the changes introduced in 2012.

I have outlined the actions that have been taken already. We recognise that women who have taken time out are at risk in terms of pension rates. It is expected that the total contribution approach will replace the yearly average approach for new pensioners from 2020. The aim of this approach is to make the rate of contributory pension more closely matched to contributions made by a person. This is a very significant reform with considerable legal, administrative and technical elements in its implementation. An important element in the final design of the scheme will be the position of women who have gaps in their contribution records as a result of caring duties. That factor is of course being considered very carefully in terms of developing this reform. The Minister, Deputy Regina Doherty, is currently working with her Department on the detailed development of the total contribution approach with a view to making proposals for consideration later in the year.

It is then intended to have a public consultation which will provide an opportunity for people to submit their views on the proposals. Following this consultation process, proposals on the final details of the scheme will be made to the Government. That is an important element of dealing with this issue. The Minister is engaging on that work and an important part of it will be to examine the issue of women who have gaps in their contribution records as a result of caring duties. Serious account will be taken of this when dealing with this reform.

If one committed to backdating the homemaker's scheme or changing the rate bands, it would cost between €200 million and €300 million. The rate changes reversal would come to €60 million in 2018, rising by an additional €10 million per year. The issue is on the agenda and is being considered by the Minister. It will be an important part of the reform she is examining with the total contribution approach. The whole aim of that is to ensure the rate of contributory pension more closely matches the contributions made by a person but taking account of gaps in women's contribution records.

Is the Government seriously asking women to wait until 2020 for this matter to be resolved? That is bonkers, unbelievable and unacceptable. Every Member accepts the changes introduced in 2012 disproportionately affect and impoverish women. I have told the Tánaiste that almost 25% of women in receipt of a State pension are discriminated against to the tune of €30 a week. That is a lot of money for people on a fixed income. Something needs to be done about it now.

The Tánaiste deliberately and cynically conflated two matters. The retrospective application of the homemaker's scheme would cost several hundred millions of euro. What needs to happen in the here and now is a reversal of the band and rate changes introduced in 2012. The Tánaiste was correct that the cost to the Exchequer of that would be €70 million. That is what needs to happen.

Will the Deputy put a question?

The women affected campaigned on this issue before the budget. Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil were aware of this issue before they signed off on the budget. The women in question have been led to believe there is unanimous support in the Dáil for the reversal of the 2012 changes, and that the Dáil understands and will end this discrimination against women. That is what needs to happen. I am putting it to the Tánaiste that she makes that happen now.

In the timeframe I outlined, I stated the Minister would make some recommendations later this year. The 2020 date related to the implementation of the total contribution action, TCA, to replace the yearly average approach. The Minister is working with her Department on the detailed development of that with a view to making proposals for consideration later in the year.

It is worth pointing out the many positive changes in the budget for families such as reducing costs and supporting child care.

The Tánaiste was not asked that question.

Many other budgetary decisions were taken this year which were important in increasing income for working families, reducing taxes for those in work and supporting families in a whole range of other ways.

This is a particularly challenging issue. I have already accepted that we do not want discriminatory elements in pension provision.

Then the Government should reverse it.

Women have to deal with the impact of this on an ongoing basis. The Government is examining the issues and, in particular, the Minister in the context of the total contribution approach. She is conscious of this particular issue for women who have gaps in their contribution record which impacts on their current pension.