asked the Minister for Economic Planning and Development the arrangements, if any, that are under consideration to provide for orderly wage negotiations in the aftermath of the rejection of the national understanding.
10.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - National Understanding Rejection.
9.
asked the Minister for Economic Planning and Development the up to date position on Government policy in regard to the national understanding, following its rejection by the Unions and the steps now proposed to be taken to negotiate an arrangement.
11.
asked the Minister for Economic Planning and Development if he will make a statement on the situation arising from the rejection by the ICTU of the proposed national understanding.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 9, 10 and 11 together.
The Taoiseach and other Ministers met with representatives of the employers and the Irish Congress of Trade Unions recently to discuss the situation arising from the rejection of the national understanding. In the light of these discussions the Government have given careful consideration to the appropriate measures which should be taken to ensure an orderly development of incomes in the economy. As Deputies are by now aware, the Government have decided that, over the period of six months with effect from the expiry dates of the 1978 National Wage Agreement, a general increase of up to 7 per cent related to the cost of living increase from November to May may be negotiated. The pay guidelines which were the subject of a statement issued by the Government on Tuesday, clearly limit the circumstances under which claims for additional increases may be pursued. It is also the intention that the guidelines will apply to increases in professional fees and directors' fees.
The Government consider that in the present and prospective international economic climate these interim arrangements are essential to ensure that the economy is not endangered by excessive pay or other income settlements. The Government are inviting representatives of the employers and of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions to meetings at an early date to discuss how the period during which this interim pay arrangement is in force can best be used to settle longer-term measures designed to raise employment and promote the further development of the economy.
The Minister said that the Government proposed that the 7 per cent would apply to professional fees and directors' salaries. How does he propose to ensure that professional fees rise by only 7 per cent in the period mentioned?
The Minister for Industry, Commerce and Energy has the authority to control professional fees under the Prices Acts and it is the intention to exercise this authority rigorously during the period in which the norm applies.
If any person exceeds the 7 per cent, what sanctions are there?
I cannot answer that question offhand but I believe there are appropriate sanctions for breaches of the Prices Acts.
It was mentioned on Tuesday last, and perhaps the Minister will confirm or deny, that firms seeking price increases in which there is a wage element of more than 7 per cent will not be granted those increases. Is that definite Government policy?
Yes, this is one method by which this might be enforced and I am sure there are other methods, as the Deputy will appreciate. However, I would like to indicate that the meetings with the employer organisations and the ICTU have been arranged for Tuesday next. In anticipation of these meetings, I do not wish to be too dogmatic about this matter. The reactions of the groups concerned could be of relevance as to how this matter is treated.
Have the Government any statutory authority to impose a maximum wage settlement? If so, under what Act do they have that authority? Is the Minister happy that the statement made by the Government will bring about an improvement in the industrial situation?
To the best of my knowledge the Government do not have statutory authority at the moment to apply a limit across the board. As I indicated earlier, certain methods are open to the Government for enforcement of a norm of this kind. The question of whether this announcement and arrangement by the Government would bring about an improvement in industrial relations, which I think is what the Deputy has in mind, depends on the reaction of various groups to this statement by the Government. However, I remind the Deputy of what I said, that the purpose of this is to unable various groups involved to discuss how the period envisaged, the six months from the appropriate date of the expiration of the National Pay Agreement, can best be used to secure long-term measures to raise employment and promote the further development of the economy. I remind the Deputy also of what I said about the existing and prospective international economic climate from which we cannot isolate ourselves.
Would the Minister agree that the establishment of some sort of industrial peace is a first priority here if the other economic gains are to be achieved? If that is so, would it not have been more appropriate for the Minister and his colleagues to have come to some arrangement in advance with the ICTU about this 7 per cent norm, as he calls it? Will he tell the House why the ICTU were not even advised or consulted on this in advance?
The ICTU are, of course, being consulted as are the employers' organisations, as I indicated. Of course I subscribe to the proposition that the advancement of interest of the people will be assisted greatly by industrial peace. Nevertheless the Deputy will appreciate that industrial peace secured as a result of enormously inordinate pay increases would not be in the interests of anybody, including those who receive such pay increases.
I appreciate what the Minister says about meeting the employers and the unions next week and I do not want to say anything to damage the prospect of that. Is it the Government's hope that a new national understanding could be drawn up with the partners?
Again, I do not want to anticipate what may emerge. It will be appreciated that what the Government have put forward, which is for a relatively short period in some cases, in effect three and a half months from now——
Two and a half months.
——would enable a breathing space to occur if people wish to avail of it. What might emerge during that breathing space if accepted is a matter for all the parties concerned. I do not wish to anticipate what might emerge from it, but certainly I would wish to ensure that various options that might be desired by the parties would be open to them. I do not wish to close off any such options. Obviously one possible option would be that mentioned by the Deputy.
Question No. 12.
One further point of clarification. There is mention that public service parity claims or extra claims made before 1 June would stand. Also in the budget the Minister allowed £75 million for these claims plus any wage increases that might occur in the normal way for the public service in 1979. Is that £75 million sufficient to meet the 7 per cent proposed in the next six months and the special claims that may be in the process of negotiation at the moment?
That is a separate question.
I appreciate that the Minister may not have all that information.
I could not answer that question offhand. Even with notice of the question I would have some difficulty because in the case of some of the claims they have not been determined. Therefore, I could not say exactly what they are going to cost. Apart from that I do not have that information here at the moment.
Is the Minister satisfied that £75 million is sufficient to meet any further charges on the Exchequer in 1979 in regard to wages? He must have had that figure on the table when he was talking about 7 per cent.
I would hope that it would be adequate for that purpose.
I am calling question No. 12.
May I ask one further question?
No, I am sorry.