Sir, – Reading the announcement by Minister for Social Protection Leo Varadkar on his solution for the "unsustainable" state pension system, it's clear that younger Irish generations will once again be paying for the mistakes of those that have gone before us ("State pension scheme is 'unsustainable', says Varadkar", July 18th).
At least there is now an official admission that the numbers do not add up. However, the Government must go further and clearly state its policy on the matter, what its long-term implications will be for those of us aged 35 and younger, and then advertise this widely so we can prepare accordingly.
If it is going to prioritise one group of voters over another, it can at least minimise the pain for those it has spurned. – Yours, etc,
DEANE BARTON,
Raheny,
Dublin 5.
A chara, – There is little doubt but that a pensions crisis is coming and that the state pension, already under pressure, will not be able to sustain that pressure ad infinitum and changes will come.
All the more reason therefore for the Government and the industry to now seriously consider the idea of “pensions for children”. The principle is simple; start a pension for you children from birth so that there are 65 years of contributions, and not 45. Parents would pay into the fund until their child leaves school at 18 or leaves college at 23, and from then on our beloved offspring would take on the responsibility themselves.
The idea of pensions for children is not new and the discussions have been doing the rounds for some years now. It is an initiative focused on the next generation, and not the next general election, which may explain why it has not yet seen the light of day.
The concept could be a real antidote to the impending crisis and it is surely time for those in Government, and in the pensions industry, to develop the idea into a workable model for future generations. – Is mise,
GARY DOYLE,,
Straffan, Co Kildare.
Sir, – Cantillon hits the nail on the head (July 19th). "What chance of the Government really telling people they must live on less now to save for a future up to 40 years hence?"
Somewhere between slim and none. – Yours, etc,
JOHN KELLY,
Dublin 8.