Vol. 330 No. 6
Cavan-Monaghan): I move:
That a supplementary sum not exceeding £151,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1981, for the salaries and expenses of the State Laboratory.
When I spoke in this debate before we adjourned last week my initial comments were that provided we adopted the correct budgetary strategy and the correct economic policy there was considerable hope for the economic and social future of the nation. I made that statement because I am afraid that the political parties may not be adopting that strategy. We have a young, growing and talented population. Our labour force is growing at the rate of 15,000 per year. We have a fundamental obligation in politics to ensure that the right investment and economic climate exists so that those young people have some prospect of jobs in the 1980s.
The Minister must be frustrated or under pressure.
I am clarifying something the former Taoiseach agreed to — the Supplementary Estimate for the State Laboratory.
It was never agreed.
It went through without any discussion.
I am sorry to contradict the Minister, but it was not agreed to by anybody on this side of the House.
The Ceann Comhairle put it and I had no option——
There was no agreement with this side of the House and I want to make that very clear. I am not saying we would not agree to this, but no opportunity for agreeing was given to this side of the house. I wonder what happened. It was simply a case of the Taoiseach stepping out of his place and the Minister of State stepping in. We were never asked for agreement.
I have to obey the Chair.
I want to put it on the record that this business was not done as it should have been.
I am sorry, Deputy, but I have to obey the Chair. The Ceann Comhairle asked the Taoiseach to move the Supplementary Estimate; the Taoiseach moved it and the Ceann Comhairle said "Supplementary Estimate agreed." He then left the Chair. I have no responsibility in the matter. If the Opposition wish, I am quite willing to move the Supplementary Estimate.
I do not want to be difficult but when the Minister stood up to speak I thought he was moving the Supplementary Estimate.
That was the feeling of the Chair.
There is no item of controversy in this Supplementary Estimate, but I assumed when the Minister stood——
I assumed likewise but unfortunately the Ceann Comhairle said "Supplementary Estimate agreed", then he left the Chair. I am willing to go through the normal procedure.
I am not pushing this but I assumed the Minister was moving the Supplementary Estimate.
I was not present to here the statement you say was made by the Ceann Comhairle. It appears that the correct procedure would be if we proceeded as is indicated in the Order Paper, that is, that the debate on the Supplementary Estimate will conclude not later than 4.30 p.m.
That was my reading as well.
I suggest we stay with that.
I am in your hands.
I was not present at the time but I understand the Minister for Fisheries and Forestry, Deputy Fitzpatrick, moved the Supplementary Estimate for the State Laboratory. Therefore it would be in order for the Minister to make an opening statement.
The only reason I started to speak on the Finance Bill was that the Ceann Comhairle indicated the Supplementary Estimate was agreed, and then he left the Chair.
He may have done that but I did not hear him.
Will the Minister of State make the opening speech?
Yes.
Had the previous speech been on the Finance Bill?
Yes.
There is some confusion here.
The Supplementary Estimate is for £151,000 comprising £176,000 on subhead A of the Supplementary Estimate, as circulated — Salaries, Wages and Allowances — offset by a saving of £25,000 on subhead D, namely, apparatus and chemical equipment. That is all that is involved. I repeat the total is for £151,000.
I was not pressing that the Minister of State should speak but, as I said, when he rose I thought he was about to speak on the Estimate. We agree with the Supplementary Estimate but I want to ask a few questions. In which specific areas were there savings of £25,000? What apparatus and equipment were not provided, and why? Would the Minister be more specific and tell us if this Supplementary Estimate was introduced because of increased numbers, or because of increased salaries not envisaged, and whether the Government's embargo of 21 July has put the State Laboratory in the same position as many other Government Departments of having vacancies? As I said, I would like to have this information but we are not opposing this Supplementary Estimate.
I am pleased to be able to reply to Deputy Fitzgerald's inquiries. In my view, those inquiries, in terms of political discretion, might not have been made because as the Deputy knows there was a Government decision to reduce all the 1981 Estimates by 5 per cent. The Deputy will remember it well.
I have asked specific questions. Do not try to mislead the House. I am prepared to stay here until 4.30 p.m. or until I get answers to my specific questions.
The answer is here. The State Laboratory requested an additional £176,000 under subhead A of the Supplementary Estimate for 1981. Their original allocation for 1981 — the allocation the former Taoiseach insisted that the Minister should put into the Estimate——
On a point of order, I am prepared to be co-operative and accept this Supplementary Estimate, but I am not prepared to listen to untrue statement——
Reality.
——passed across the House by the Minister of State. If this is the attitude he wants to adopt, I am prepared to keep this Estimate debate going until 4.30 p.m. but I want answers — I insist on answers — to my questions.
Deputy Fitzgerald is entitled to ask questions and I understand the Minister of State is prepared to answer them.
I will give the answers.
Without untrue statements.
The Deputy cannot use the word "untrue".
I can, because they are.
The original allocation for 1981 under subhead A, which covers wages and salaries, was £470,000. By the end of September 1981 all but £4,400 of this allocation was spent. Put in another form, the original allocation was totally inadequate. This Supplementary Estimate is needed for the following reasons: there was a substantial pay award granted to technicians from 1 January 1979. and to chemists with effect from 1 January 1980, amounting to expenditure of £145,000 in 1981. There was a consequential Government decision—your decision — to reduce all the 1981 Estimates by 5 per cent and this led to a reduction of £25,000 in Subhead A of the State Laboratory Vote. In addition there were special pay increases with arrears payable to clerical and subordinate staff amounting to £6,000. This was during your period of negotiation.
I would ask the Minister of State to refrain from using the word "your". He is addressing the Chair.
The State Laboratory were unable to secure the savings at B by the non-filling of vacancies but a corresponding saving was made under Subhead D—Apparatus and Chemical Equipment—and this will offset this increase in expenditure on salaries and wages. Nevertheless, the net effect is that an additional Supplementary Estimate of £151,000 is required. I do not want to be contentious but this is the picture which emerges throughout the public sector in terms of last year's Estimates. This is only a small sample.
On a point of order, I asked some specific questions to which in typical style the Minister of State did not reply. We have heard his allegations and waffle. I asked what items of apparatus and equipment were saved and, secondly, how many unfilled vacancies there have been in the State Laboratory since 21 July as a result of this Government's embargo.
Deputy Fitzgerald will appreciate that the Chair is not responsible for the reaction of any speaker to questions put. The manner in which the Minister of State or any other Member reacts to such questions is entirely a matter for himself.
I accept that. You would have my sympathy were you to accept responsibility for the statements of some members of this Government.
