A CALL HAS been made for the Government to request the judiciary to “furnish details of cost-cutting measures in line with those of other public sector workers”.
James Bannon (FG, Longford-Roscommon) questioned in the Dáil the constitutional exclusion of the judiciary and the President from paying the pension levy.
While the exemption under Article 35 of the Constitution appeared to be justified, “the Constitution was never meant to be a veil for the judiciary or anyone else”.
He claimed it was still within the “gift” of the Minister for Finance to “turn his attention to cost-cutting measures in the judiciary” through the 1998 Court Services Act.
However, Minister of State Mary Wallace insisted “our Constitution is quite clear on this. Article 35.5 expressly states ‘the remuneration of a judge shall not be reduced during his continuance in office’.”
Ms Wallace, speaking for the Minister for Finance, added: “We have legal advice confirming that the pension-related deduction should not be applied to the judiciary.”
Mr Bannon, who raised the issue on the adjournment, said “as members of the judiciary well know, no one is above the law. Likewise, in these extraordinary times no one should be above making sacrifices for the well-being of their country.
“Why should those who are struggling to make ends meet see the judiciary, who are at the top of the public service pay scale, escaping the payment of this levy.
“If nothing else noblesse oblige should impel our judges to make a voluntary contribution.”
He said Government actions “lack equity as they bypass the upper levels, including the President and the judiciary, and leave the lower and middle-income sectors to bear the brunt of the Government’s pension levy”.
He was “puzzled” as to why the Minister chose to copperfasten the exemption by including it in the pension levy legislation.
Ms Wallace said the principle behind the pension levy was that it “should apply across the public service” but the judiciary was “one category to which the deduction does not apply”.
