Gabhaim buíochas leis an mbeirt Teachta Dála as an ábhar tábhachtach seo a ardú anocht. As Deputies Cullinane and McGuinness set out, the issue relates to a group of former workers who left the service of Waterford Crystal between 1990 and 1992 under a redundancy arrangement. At the time of the redundancy, the workers received a refund of their pension contributions relating to their service in the relevant company pension schemes up to that time. Consequently, they then ceased to be members of the pension schemes and no longer had any rights or entitlements under those schemes. This was a private agreement entered into by the workers themselves with their former employers. Separately, in 2010, a legal action was taken by a group of former Waterford Crystal workers against the State following the insolvency of the Waterford Crystal factory and staff pension schemes. The case, which is known as the Hogan case, related to the failure of the State to adequately transpose into Irish law the relevant provisions of the European Union’s insolvency directive. The directive requires member states to ensure that necessary measures are taken to protect employees’ occupational pension scheme benefits where an employer becomes insolvent. In 2015, a mediated settlement was reached between the parties to that legal action. The mediated settlement applied to all persons who were members of the Waterford Crystal staff and factory pension schemes on the date of wind-up of the schemes, namely, 31 March 2009. In total, 1,774 scheme members were covered by the agreement. The total costs to the Exchequer arising from the mediated agreement were estimated at €253 million. No member of the schemes with a pension entitlement at the date of wind-up was excluded from the mediated settlement in respect of their benefits. The former employees of Waterford Crystal who previously took redundancy and received refunds of pension contributions were not eligible to be included in the mediated settlement as they had no benefits retained in the scheme. Those who took partial refunds maintained an entitlement commensurate with their level of benefits that remained in the scheme. This group of workers, the Waterford Crystal Pension Action Group, WCPAG, disputes the receipt of pension option forms at the time they were made redundant. The question regarding the provision of leaving service options is one for the employer and the trustees, rather than the State. I understand that some members of WCPAG took a legal action against these parties, which was ultimately settled. My Department was not party to these proceedings but the outcome did not reinstate the members pension rights in the pension schemes. Following a meeting with some of those affected in September 2024, the former Taoiseach and current Tánaiste, Deputy Harris, requested the Attorney General to review the claims being made, including the allegations around the failure to provide leaving service options. The Attorney General advised that there is no basis on which the State could be obliged to compensate the members concerned or otherwise intervene. I appreciate that the members of WCPAG feel an injustice has been done to them. Unfortunately, it is not something the State was party to or can now resolve. As I have communicated to the group and Deputy Cullinane, nothing has changed from my Department’s perspective. There is no basis for me to intervene, considering that the Attorney General has reviewed this issue comprehensively. In those circumstances, I do not feel a meeting is warranted. I hope this clarifies the matter for both Deputies.

Sentiment score: 0.10

I thank both Deputies. I will again clarify the position. The former employees took refunds of their contributions. They have no pension entitlements. Therefore, they had no entitlement under the mediated settlement. The Pensions Authority has also advised that there has been no breach of the Pensions Act in this case. Some took legal action against the parties. That action was settled. It did not involve the State in any way. The Attorney General has comprehensively reviewed all of the information that was provided to him in September 2024 and his advice is that nothing further can be done in the case. In other cases, the Deputies will have found instances where I feel there can be a solution but, on this occasion, a meeting would be unfair because it may create an expectation that I cannot meet. The Attorney General’s advice is very clear. Nothing further can be done in this case, as of now.

Sentiment score: 0.02