Cathal Berry (Kildare South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

158. To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if he will advocate for the introduction of an occupational supplementary pension for post 2013 Defence Forces personnel, to bridge the four year gap that now exists between forced retirement at 62 yeas and access to the State pension at 66 years considering this cohort makes up well over 50% of all Defence Forces personnel of all ranks; the issue also impacts the Fire Brigade, Prison Service and Garda; 79% of post 2013 Defence Forces officers do not see a long term future in the Defence Forces due to these inferior and unviable pension arrangements. [43238/24]

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The occupational pension scheme terms of post-1 January 2013 new entrants to the public service, including the Permanent Defence Force (PDF), are governed by the Public Service Pensions (Single Scheme and Other Provisions) Act 2012. The terms and rules of the Single Scheme – which are fundamentally different to previous superannuation public service arrangements – make no provision for the concept or award of ‘supplementary pensions’ for any new entrants joining any public service group from 1 January 2013 onwards.

Supplementary Pensions are not a feature of the Single Scheme, nor are they envisaged to be. The uniformed branches, such as PDF, gardaí, and others benefit from having fast accrual terms, and the PDF have compulsory retirement ages, recently increased to age 62. This mandatory retirement age is lower than the age at which they can receive the State Contributory Pension (currently age 66). The PDF are eligible to receive the full amount of the Single Pensions Scheme benefits they have accrued immediately on retirement from age 50 or above, as well as still having the opportunity to work in other employment.

Under the 2012 Act, overall statutory responsibility for the Single Scheme pension terms and conditions comes under the remit of the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform and the appropriateness or otherwise of the application of that particular provision would of course be a matter for that Minister and his Department.

I understand that the situation regarding ‘supplementary pensions’ has previously been confirmed at various times by the Official Side, which includes the Department of Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform. The position is that – given the overriding policy and fiscal objectives of the Single Scheme – supplementary pensions are inconsistent with the terms of the Single Pension Scheme Act 2012; and that there are no plans to review the Act.