Sir, – We have been subjected recently to Government ministers saying they cannot do anything about the huge pensions being received by retired top bankers due to “contractual commitments”, and as such obscene amounts of taxpayers’ money have had to be used to top-up bankers’ pension schemes which were in deficit (it’s hardly surprising that they were as bad at running their own pension schemes as they were the banks).
In a normal world, when an employer goes bust, a pension scheme in deficit becomes one of many creditors waiting in vain for money that the insolvent employer cannot pay. In the case of Irish banks however, due to their necessity for the rest of the economy, the government was obliged to bail them out; but why should that bailout, morally and/or legally, have extended to the banks’ various pension schemes? Any deficits therein should be treated as crystallising at the time of the bailout (and pension benefits accordingly reduced).
It requires political leadership, something which is sorely lacking, to seize the bull by the horns and do what is right and just for the country, rather than pander to the people at the heart of the country’s financial crisis. Should the Constitution need to be changed to expedite such action, then I’m sure the turnout (and Yes vote) would be much larger than for the children referendum. – Yours, etc,