Tairgim:
Go ndeonófar suim nach mó ná £38,600 chun íoctha an mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31ú lá de Mhárta, 1967, le hagaidh Tuarastail agus Costais Oifig an Aire Saothair.
Sar a dtosnóidh mé ar an gnáth ráiteas míniúcháin i leith na tairisceana seo a chur faoi bhráid na Dála, ba mhaith liom focal beag pearsanta a rá.
Onóir mhór dom gur mise a cuireadh i bhfeidhil na Roinne seo nuair a bunaíodh í de bhun reachtaíochta an Oireachtais i ndeireadh an tseisúin deiridh. Tá neart oibre déanta cheana féin chun an Roinn a chur ar a bonnaibh; tá an-chuid le déanamh fós, áfach. Ní féidir le héinne dul i mbun gnótha chomh táchtach le dualgais na Roinne Saothair gan a bheith imníoch umhalchroíoch ann féin. Mar sin féin tá dóchas agam go mbeidh tuiscint agus comh-oibriú cóir le fáil ó na Teachtaí, ó na haicmí uile a mbeidh baint ag an Roinn Saothair leo agus ón bpobal i gcoitinne, agus ná clisfidh mé ar an nDáil.
The Department of Labour was established on the 13th July, 1966, and certain sections of the Department of Industry and Commerce were transferred to the new Department as from that date. The Employment Service and a number of headquarters staff of the Department of Social Welfare were transferred to the Department as from 3rd October, 1966. It is not necessary to make any changes in the existing financial arrangements in the current year in respect of the transferred services for which provision is made in the Votes for Industry and Commerce (Vote 40) and Social Welfare (Vote 47). Accordingly, expenditure on those services to the end of 1966-67 will, as indicated in the note to the Estimate, continue to be borne on Votes 40 and 47 and accounted for by the Office of the Minister for Industry and Commerce and the Office of the Minister for Social Welfare respectively.
The expenditure for which the authority of the Dáil is now being sought relates, therefore, only to certain services not provided for in the other two Votes. This expenditure is necessary so that the Department can get going. The new posts covered by the Estimate are the minimum immediately required. A good deal of work, including the promotion of some important legislation, requires to be done before firm decisions can be taken on the structure of the Department. The funds now sought from the Dáil will, I hope, enable the bulk of that work to be completed in the current financial year.
When he was speaking in this House last June on the Bill providing for the establishment of the Department, the Taoiseach explained fully why the Government considered it necessary to set up a seperate Department of Labour at that time. He also outlined in general terms the functions which the Department would discharge. There was general agreement about the need for a special Department to do the work outlined by the Taoiseach. I propose now to refer to progress made since the Department began to function, to set out the main tasks which lie before us, and to give an indication of the way in which I propose that these tasks should be tackled.
Before I do this I should like to sketch briefly the historical background against which we are operating. Some of the legislation which the Minister for Labour has inherited was enacted by the British Parliament as far back as the middle of the last century. This fact alone suggests the desirability of a wide ranging review of the various Acts, which Deputies will find listed in the relevant Transfer of Functions Order presented to the Dáil in July last.
A Ministry of Labour operated under the first Dáil Éireann and the second Dáil Éireann, and did a good deal particularly in the field of conciliation and mediation in industrial disputes. For the record, I should say that there were only two holders of the office of Minister of Labour, namely, Madame Markievicz and Joseph McGrath.
On the establishment of the separate Irish State, the functions of the Dáil Ministry of Labour, together with various services, including the Employment Service, operated by the British Government Departments, were allocated to the Department of Industry and Commerce. In 1947 the Employment Service became the responsibility of the newly-formed Department of Social Welfare.
It is appropriate here to refer to the impressive volume of work done in this field by the Departments of Industry and Commerce and Social Welfare. This work is reflected in legislation on conditions of employment, industrial relations, holidays, apprenticeships, and on conditions in factories, shops, offices and mines and quarries. There are also the progressive improvements in the social welfare code. In addition, one must acknowledge the many changes for the better which have been induced and facilitated by the influence and activities of those Departments down through the years.
As the Government see it, the primary duty of the Department of Labour is to protect and foster the interests of workers in matters which are properly the concern of the Government. The aim will be to bring about conditions in which workers, through wage increases, improvements in working conditions and other benefits, are rewarded fairly for their labours. It will be my concern to see that, as far as can be achieved by legislation, official action or guidance, the worker is safeguarded in his workplace and that he is sheltered so far as possible, against the adverse effects of economic and technical change. However, real improvements in the lot of workers, as of any other category of persons, can only be achieved if national production is expanded. It is very clear by now that monetary increases which are not supported by an expansion of production or improvements in productivity are quickly overtaken by rises in prices and other developments which nullify the increases in pay.
In pointing out the limitation imposed by economic laws on those seeking improvements in pay and conditions, I do not suggest that workers and others should suspend efforts to secure improvements to which they consider themselves entitled and which they believe can be attained. It is desirable, however, that negotiations and other processes involved should be conducted with the minimum degree of dislocation and discord. This requires an element of restraint, of willingness by parties concerned to use the procedures available and of readiness to make concessions when the need to make them is established.
One of the features of the work of a Department of Labour is that emotion, tradition and subjective elements play a big part. It is necessary, therefore, for the Minister and his officials to understand the motivation for actions and behaviour which to other people may sometimes appear irrational. I would hope, too, that the members of the Dáil would have regard to these considerations, so that feelings which sometimes arise in this area will not be excessively inflamed.
This is not to discourage comment or criticism of my handling of the Department. I shall indeed welcome helpful suggestions and constructive criticism from members of the Dáil and from any other source. But we in this House must also show restraint and avoid statements and postures which could be damaging to the success of what must be our common effort in this field. It would be little short of calamitous if these matters were to be befogged by and, perhaps buried, under the dust of acrimonious political bickering. I shall, of course, be answerable to the Dáil for the administration of the Department and, of course, the Government's record will be submitted to the people in due course.
There is in existence a body of law relating to the protection of workers at their places of work and I have at my disposal a team of inspectors who visit factories and other work-places to see that the statutory requirements are carried out. The inspectors are also available to give advice when required. Economic harm can be done as a result of losses of production arising out of industrial accidents and industrial illnesses. But this is an area in which human considerations completely outweigh economic factors. I need not dwell on the consequences which may ensue for a worker and his dependants as a result of a serious accident or illness—and it is disturbing to contemplate that many accidents which have occurred need never have happened.
I propose to do all in my power to secure whatever reduction is attainable in the number of such accidents and illnesses. To this end I have directed that the adequacy of the staffing of the factory inspectorate should be reviewed to see whether some addition to the strength would help. But a strengthening of the inspectorate, if effected, will not, in itself, be enough. We need to get more co-operation from both managements and workers.
I should like to see more managements seeking the advice of the factory inspectors on measures to improve safety and health-protection measures. There should be a safety committee, established by workers under the Factories Act, in every plant in the country. The number of such committees is, so far, pitifully small and I am considering whether any special measures can be taken to promote the formation of more of them. I am considering also how I can assist more effectively the excellent work being done by the National Industrial Safety Organisation, which is representative of management, trade unions, and the factory inspectorate, and the main function of which is to stimulate a greater awareness of the pressing need for improved safety measures.
There are a number of other Acts relating to the welfare of workers which have now been on the statute book for a considerable number of years. I am drawing up a programme for a systematic review of all these measures, in consultation with those affected by them, with a view to determining their relevance to present circumstances and to the conditions which we are likely to meet in the future.
Industrial relations have possibly been the most publicised area of my responsibility. As Deputies know, wages and salaries are ordinarily settled and adjusted through a system of free collective bargaining. This process is enshrined in a number of international conventions and it has been accepted, in principle at least, by organised labour, by employer organisations and by the public generally in this country. The process may be generally described as negotiations about pay, conditions or terms of employment between, on the one hand, an employer, a group of employers or one or more employer organisations and, on the other hand, one or more representative workers' organisations, with a view to reaching agreement.
Traditionally, negotiators are concerned to make the best bargain they can. However, the interplay of various economic forces was supposed to operate to keep agreements from getting too much out of line and to keep the totality of wage or salary increases from outrunning the growth in national production, which, of course, was what supported all incomes.
Experience over recent years, here and in other countries has however, compelled people to take a hard look at the system. The fact is that increases in certain incomes and in wages and salaries as a whole, even when improvements in productivity are taken into account, have been greater than the growth in national production would justify, thus forcing up costs and prices, and making it difficult for us to sell our goods abroad.
If collective bargaining continues to produce this trend, then it is clear that it is a national necessity to examine the system. Some people allege that the system itself is defective, that it is unsuited to contemporary needs and that it should be replaced. Before contemplating that possibility, however, I propose to explore an alternative explanation, which is that the system, as it has been operated here, has been working imperfectly, or possibly that it has, on occasion, been abused.
Whatever the requirements may be for the satisfactory working of free collective bargaining in our circumstances, one requirement certainly is that the parties to negotiations should be alive to the consequences of their actions for others and indeed, for the community as a whole. Negotiators are now in a position to obtain, from official sources and otherwise, all the information they reasonably require to enable them to form a judgment on the effect of possible types of settlements that may emerge; this is particularly important where "key" agreements, which may influence the pattern in other industries or occupations, are under negotiation. If the implications are ignored, then industrial peace in a particular occupations or industry may be purchased at too high a price to the community, not excluding those who may have gained an initial and short-term advantage.
I shall regard it as my duty to see that negotiators have access to the most up-to-date information on national economic affairs. I shall continue to exhort them to have proper regard to that information when making settlements, in the hope that adjustments in wages, salaries and conditions will be kept within the bounds set by increases in national production. If, having done all that, I find that settlements in excess of the growth in national production are being negotiated, then some fundamental policy changes in regard to our procedures must be considered. For the moment, however, I am concentrating on the promotion of amending legislation on industrial relations.
The purpose of this legislation will be to try to remedy the imperfections, and to lessen or eliminate the obstacles to the proper working of negotiation and free collective bargaining. The comments and suggestions of interested parties on my proposals have been received and considered. I have now set up two working parties, one with the trade unions and the other with the employers, to see if acceptable proposals can be worked out which will take account of the public interest. In this operation I expect both sides in industry to keep the welfare of the community as a whole in the forefront of their minds. If they do, it will make the promotion of the necessary legislation easier in due course.
The law governing the affairs of trade unions is still largely based on statutes taken over from the British administration. It dates back as far as 1871. Much of it was framed when trade unions were weak, harried and in need of protection. I have already said publicly that I am certain that we must soon, in consultation with those intimately concerned, undertake a comprehensive review of trade union law, with a view to reshaping it to the needs and circumstances of our times. I regard this as a long-term operation, but I believe that there are some improvements which are urgently needed and which should not be delayed until a full review of the law is completed.
I propose that these should be effected by means of amending legislation which will be put before the Dáil at the same time as the Industrial Relations Bill. Lest there be any misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the purpose of the Government's immediate proposals, which have also been in the hands of workers' and employers'representatives for some time, I want to stress that their purpose is not to weaken the trade unions but to assist them in buttressing up the democratic foundations on which they are based.
The trade union movement itself has been having a look at the need to reshape and reconstruct the trade unions so that they may be better placed to serve the interests of their members and to take a more effective part in the development of the nation. The legislation which I have mentioned may provide the framework for rationalisation and reorganisation, but the Government believe that the task is essentially one for the movement itself. I welcome the progress already achieved in this direction and I hope that it will be accelerated. There may be limits to the extent to which the Government can effectively help the trade unions in this work at this time but I am certainly willing to sit down with the responsible representatives of the movement to work out how the Government could provide useful assistance to trade unions in overcoming the formidable problems, financial and otherwise, standing in the way of rationalisation and reorganisation.
I wish to make it clear that there is no disposition on the part of the Government to interfere in the internal affairs of the trade union movement. The fact is that certain features of trade union organisation tend to be a cause of damage to the community—and the community is in large part composed of trade union members. For that reason, the Government, in safeguarding the public interest, have an obligation to concern themselves in the matter.
I think it is only proper for me to record here my view that the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, within its powers and resources, has been guiding the movement as a whole in a responsible way.
While I have been speaking of trade unions of workers, I am not overlooking the fact that trade unions of employers and employers' organisations must also be responsive to the requirements of the national interest.
The subject of manpower policy has been debated fairly fully in the Oireachtas during the past year and I think it would be sufficient for me to summarise the progress which has been made and the developments in prospect. I aim to push ahead with a number of measures designed to make it easier for the worker to change jobs and to help him financially in the process of making a change from one job to another.
The Industrial Training Bill which provides for the establishment of an authority with wide powers to deal with industrial training and retraining, was given a Second Reading in Dáil Éireann before the Summer Recess. The views of the main interested organisations have now been received and a Committee has been set up to examine the Bill in detail before the Committee Stage is taken. This Committee, representing employers' and workers' organisations, will have as chairman an officer of my Department and will complete its work as quickly as possible. I hope that it may be possible to take the Committee Stage in the present session.
Consultations with the interested parties about the schemes for redundancy payments and resettlement allowances have been completed and the necessary legislation is being drafted at present. The Bill will be a formidable one but, unless some unforeseen complications arise, it should be ready for introduction and circulation in time to enable the Dáil to debate the principles involved before the Christmas recess.
The Employment Service was transferred to my Department early this month. I propose to approach the development of the placement and guidance facilities of the service in two stages. A number of short-term measures to secure improvement in certain selected centres are already in train and I hope to have them in operation early next year. At the same time I am undertaking a review of the organisation and structure of the service with a view to planning and implementing measures for its long-term development.
Up to recently little progress had been made in regard to the establishment of a manpower forecasting service. The difficulty here lies in the recruitment of suitable experts; these are not available here and are in very scarce supply in other countries. A solution of this difficulty is now in sight and I am hopeful that it may be possible to initiate this service early next year.
There is a wealth of information on labour and manpower matters available at home and from other countries and from international organisations. It is clear to me, however, that it is not being sufficiently processed and disseminated. It is also apparent that our labour statistics, though adequate for most purposes, are not as comprehensive as those available in other countries. I am about to set up an Information and Research Section which will process available information from all sources and which will, in consultation with the Central Statistics Office, see whether the range of our labour statistics ought to be extended. It is my intention that this section will also undertake fundamental studies on problems in the labour and manpower fields. In addition, I shall consider whether it would be profitable of commission the undertaking of research work by outside agencies.
It is my intention that our relations with the International Labour Organisation, the Organisation for European Co-operation and Development and the Council of Europe should be developed and strengthened. I am arranging that a study should be undertaken of the extent to which these bodies might be able to advise and assist the Department in its work. It is also necessary for us to develop close links with the European Economic Community on questions of social policy so that we may begin to adjust our policies in a way which will facilitate our eventual entry into the Community.
As part of the Government's plan to keep in contact with the EEC I propose to visit Brussels early next year for discussions with representatives of the Community in regard to certain aspects of social policy, with which the Department of Labour is concerned. Continuing contacts will be maintained by officers of the Department with officials of the Commission.
The Estimate provides for the appointment of an Information Officer in the Department. The dissemination of information, the promotion of an understanding and an awareness of an economic trends, as well as the publication of material regarding the services administered by the Department and explanations of reasons for policy decisions, make it essential to have arrangements for the issue of information on matters concerning the Department. The operating details will be worked out in agreement with the Government Information Bureau.
In the field of industrial relations, and particularly when strikes are threatened or are in progress, the accuracy and reliability of press and other coverage is a matter of great importance, not only to the parties involved, but also the public generally. I have had indications that the appointment of an Information Officer —who is being recruited through the Civil Service Commission — will be welcomed by trade unions and employers and by the press and radio and television who have apparently been experiencing difficulty in getting reliable information—judging from the tenor and timing of some reports that have been published.
I do not propose that the Department of Labour should merely continue to administer the services which were taken over from the Departments of Industry and Commerce and Social Welfare. Nor do I propose that it should pursue these policies I have outlined here and then rest on its oars. All institutions, to remain useful, must be dynamic. They must be sensitive to changes in the sphere in which they are operating and they must respond to such changes. I see the Department of Labour in the role of a development corporation in the fields with which it is concerned. I want it to be constantly seeking and developing new ideas, new approaches and new initiatives. I visualise the Department to be imbued with all the best traditions of our public service, but at the same time always ready to discard procedures and outlooks which impede initiative and stultify progress.
