Ross, Shane Peter NathanielWednesday, 13 February 2002 |
Seanad Eireann Debate
Page of 8
|
Will the Minister explain why this is the case?
The House should be given an explanation for these amendments. The Minister is just telling us what they do. What is the thinking behind them? I do not understand them and we are going through them qu...
I do not understand what the Minister is talking about. He says he is deleting the definition of permanent incapacity in the context of amendments he will introduce later. Will he give us the details ...
I still do not understand. Will the Minister tell us why we are taking this out and what are the amendments on Report Stage which will necessitate its removal? If he does not we will not know why it i...
I know.
Will the Minister give us the specific reason for the removal of these lines?
On a point of order, a Chathaoirligh, is it normal for us to take lines out of a Bill conditional upon something about which we know nothing? I would have no problem with it if we knew what the Repor...
Do you see the point I am making, a Chathaoirligh? Of course it is a matter for the Minister, but it would be very useful if we were given the reasons for the removal of these lines before they are re...
It is a question for the House.
This is unsatisfactory procedure and I do not know whether there is a precedent.
I do not want to labour the point, but the Minister is assuming that what he plans to do later will actually happen. He is assuming that the House will pass the amendments he plans for Report Stage.
It is. We are being asked, however, to make what could be a very important deletion. We are doing it blind on the assurance of the Minister and on the assumption that the later amendments come through...
What is a statement of reasonable projection?
What is the value of these statements of reasonable projection? They are based on certain assumptions which are, to say the least, questionable. What is the point of giving status in law to these stat...
The Minister should expand on this. When statements of reasonable projection, which are off the top of the head forecasts, are embodied in legislation, are they binding on anybody? Do they have any va...
I am not clear about the point of this measure. I am in total agreement with the Minister about the benefits of transparency and of a valuation and facts being issued to a contributor any time he or s...
What experts? The experts are wrong.
In concrete terms, we are talking evaluation and forecasting. Forecasts are based on the value of the assets in which the pension fund invests. Is that right?
We are talking about someone forecasting the future value of these assets.
Can the Minister produce any evidence whatsoever that any of these experts have ever made any forecasts better than those of a complete amateur?
Forecast the future?
The Minister is correct. It is better that they should be aware of the state of their funds and assets and if they should make further contributions. That is not the argument – perhaps the Minister is...
What would the person do about it?
From one clown to another clown.
There is a warning on many advertisements for pension funds which states that “past performance is no guide to future return”. Basically, that is saying one cannot tell anything from history in terms ...
I am not. I am making a speech on this Bill and I am just coming to the end.
I am trying to tell a quick story.
I am trying to illustrate an important point and the story illustrates it very well. Every year we ask someone to take a completely random look at the stock market and to pick six stocks and we also a...
I think I have.
It is a very important point.
The Minister should be allowed to come back. If these so-called forecasters continue investing people's pensions in this way, we will get into a lot of trouble with pensions. We are also giving elevat...
Some 18% of Irish pension funds are in Ireland.
Will the Minister explain what events he is talking about?
I cannot think of any possibility in that regard. Will the Minister give an example of why it is necessary?
Will the Minister explain why the word “shall” is to be replaced by the word “may”?
What does subsection (1)(b) refer to?
What will the word “furnish” mean on Report Stage?
Will there be a new definition of the word “furnish” on Report Stage?
Will that mean or include electronically furnished?
What else will it mean?
Is that what it will mean?
Is it the case that it will have a very broad definition?
Why the need to provide a new definition?
I draw the attention of the Minister to something he might amend on Report Stage. I did not table an amendment because I was only alerted to it last night, but it is a serious gap in the legislation. ...
There has, however, been an omission. An employer may remit it to the trustee, administrator or manager but what happens if the administrator holds on to the money for more than 21 days? I will table ...
Section 47 deals with appointments to the board and we dealt with this matter on Second Stage. I have long had difficulties about political appointments to boards of this sort. I also have had difficu...
It is a good story.
I reject what the Minister said. He responded in the same manner as all Ministers who say they have appointed people from different political parties. The Minister has three months left in office. It ...
We shall see. The Minister has not answered my point. This legislation will affect his successors. I should not have allowed him the opportunity to say he is purer than other Ministers in this regard ...
I did not say that. I said some of them were, but I also said some were good.
Correct.
That is incorrect. Ask Dermot O'Leary.
That is correct.
The Minister cannot be serious.
May I be allowed finish on this point? The Minister has failed to answer the point. He said he would consider suggestions but he has obviously dismissed the suggestion of giving pensioners a say on wh...
They elect them.
| Last Updated: 10/09/2010 19:12:15 |
Page of 8
|