SIPTU has called on the Minister for Finance, Mr McCreevy, to withdraw or modify pension proposals contained in the Finance Bill pending greater consideration of their long-term consequences.

Its call comes just as the Consumers' Association of Ireland (CAI) has urged Mr McCreevy to "stick to his guns" on pension reform.

The union's national equality secretary, Ms Rosheen Callender, described the proposals as "a huge setback to the process of pensions planning and reform, and a major disaster for women".

The proposals abolish the compulsory purchase of annuities for the self-employed and owner directors, allowing them to take more control of their own pension funds provided £50,000 is invested in an Approved Minimum Retirement Fund.

"The fact that there is no obligation to provide for a dependent spouse displays a scant regard or concern for the vulnerable position of women in relation to pensions," Ms Callender said. "It means that many could be left `high and dry' after the death of their spouse or partner."

However, the CAI said neither SIPTU nor the Irish Association of Pension Funds, which has also come out against the change, represented the majority of self-employed people State-wide.

"Detractors are attempting to paint a pensions Armageddon through a combination of mis-selling on the one hand and a public which cannot be trusted on the other," the CAI said.

"There is truth in the notion that among the hundreds of thousands of personal pension-holders somebody will make foolish decisions. CAI, however, does not believe that this is a justifiable argument to punish everybody else and revert to compulsory annuity purchase."

It also called on the Government to "dovetail" impending commission disclosure at point of sale with the publication of the Finance Act.

Ms Callender said that as well as its concern about the implications for women, SIPTU was anxious about the implications for social partnership and the painstaking planning for the future of pensions which has been under way since the 1980s.

By effectively deregulating one part of the national pensions system, the proposals would affect the rest and would also undermine the attempts which had been made over the last 15 years to strike the best balance between the need for flexibility, security and adequacy of pension provision, she said.