Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 30 Jan 1986

Vol. 363 No. 6

Financial Resolutions, 1986. - Financial Resolution No. 13: General (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:
That it is expedient to amend the law relating to customs and inland revenue (including excise) and to make further provision in connection with finance.
—(The Taoiseach.)

As I indicated in the earlier part of my contribution on the health services, this Government's policy has been and will remain consistent with the broad strategy set down in the national plan, Building on Reality. The emphasis in policy now and for the foreseeable future is a shift towards prevention of disease and an emphasis on community care, ensuring that scarce resources are directed more specifically and selectively towards those in greatest need. The measures being taken in 1986 in the light of the allocation for health services should be judged in this way.

Naturally, at a time when resources are scarce it becomes more difficult to shift the emphasis within total spending, since development in one area must be compensated for by scaling down of activity elsewhere. This amounts to no more than a recognition that the cash resource we are dividing up is of limited size and that desirable policy changes must be achieved within those limits. However, it also imposes an obligation to ensure that the nature of the changes introduced are such as to improve the way in which resources are used. Policy changes must necessarily be directed to bringing about a more effective, equitable and efficient health care system and this Government can certainly point to a range of activities which satisfy these criteria.

First, there is no longer any argument about the need for a greater emphasis on the whole area of prevention and health promotion. This country is a party to the World Health Organisation strategy for Health for All by the year 2,000. There is a concentration in this strategy on the development in each member country of an active health promotion policy. While we can point to a number of services already provided in the preventive area, the strategy put foward by the WHO envisages a much more aggressive and comprehensive approach in which all decision making in an economy is informed to some extent by a health perspective. I contend that I have followed that approach and have introduced a number of immediate measures. For example, last year as a matter of budget policy we introduced a measles vaccination programme which came into effect on 1 October last. That scheme has achieved a 75 per cent vaccination of the target population in the short period since its introduction. This is almost three times the success rate achieved in the United Kingdom over a period of two years. The Government have provided an extra £250,000 to extend the measles scheme to the end of March, bringing total spending to date on the scheme to £900,000. The investment in this scheme will yield a very substantial return by eliminating much unnecessary and costly illness from the child population.

Developments in preventive services have not been confined to the child population, of course. Among adults, smoking is considered by the World Health Organisation to be the single most preventable cause of ill health in developed countries. Since about 5,000 deaths each year in this country are directly associated with tobacco smoking and the health of many more is impaired by smoking there is an urgent need for Ireland to adopt the type of measures advocated by the World Health Organisation.

As part of my programme to reduce the damage to health caused by smoking I recently introduced new Tobacco Products Regulations. The main effects of the new regulations are to introduce a new system of rotational health warnings and increase the space requirements for such warnings on tobacco advertisements and packages. The aim behind the new measures is to ensure that smokers are more aware of the risks smoking poses to their health.

Existing provisions relating to control of sponsorship are currently being examined and I will shortly be making recommendations to Government on any changes I think appropriate. It is also my intention to introduce shortly a Bill to prohibit smoking in certain designated public places and this Bill will include the collection of a levy on moneys used to promote sales of tobacco products, the proceeds of which will be used for additional health education on smoking and health.

At a broader level my Department are continuing to support the Kilkenny Health Project, which was inaugurated in March 1985. This project, which embodies a unique combination of research, education and primary intervention is supported by the Irish Heart Foundation and involves participation by the Medico-Social Research Board and South Eastern Health Board. Its aim is to bring about a reduction in morbidity and mortality from coronary disease in this country.

These initiatives represent concrete steps in the development of our preventive services. They demonstrate positively that it is possible to make progress, even when resources are under severe pressure, and they mark the direction in which the health services, in collaboration with other sectors, will have to devote an increasing share of their energies and resources.

The sensible strategy adopted in regard to community services is to switch the emphasis to community care when it is a viable option, recognising the need to maintain an efficient and orderly hospital system.

The Government's commitment to the development of community care is documented in a number of major service reviews completed over the past number of years. These include the report of the Working Party on the General Medical Service, which marked a serious commitment to the development of primary health care in this country and the review of psychiatric services which advocated a radical reorientation of psychiatric services to the community. The follow up to both of these reviews is currently proceeding and further reviews are planned for services for the elderly and on the whole question of community care organisation.

Commentators who point to the slow development of community care should recognise that we must learn to walk before we can run. In effecting changes in the balance between institutional and community care we need to be particularly cautious. What many people do not appreciate is that community care has significant implications for the community and not just the community-based health services. It involves to a considerable extent shifting the burden of care to the unpaid carers in the community — the families and friends of people who would otherwise be institutionalised as well as to the formal health services at community level. This caution should not be interpreted as a lack of commitment.

In the current year I am taking particular care to ensure that spending on particular community based services is maintained at a level equivalent at least to 1985 expenditure in real terms. These include key services for the old and housebound such as community nursing services, home help services and meals on wheels; child care services, particularly day care and pre-school services for deprived and disadvantaged communities, after-care programmes for children leaving long term residential care and boarding-out payments to reflect the trend towards increased numbers in foster care. The health boards have been asked to maintain at least existing levels of expenditure on dental, ophthalmic and aural services. The effect of these measures will be to discriminate in favour of community services in the allocation of resources between care programmes in 1986.

I also expect to see significant progress in 1986 in the development of comprehensive family planning services throughout the country. Following the commencement of the Family Planning (Amendment) Act, 1985, which eased many of the restrictions on access to contraception under previous legislation, the health boards were asked to review the services in their areas and to draw up plans to develop an appropriate level of service in their respective areas. Such plans have now been drawn up and their implementation, for the first time in this country, will ensure that the community has reasonable access to a full family planning service, now considered to be a basic prerequisite in the social reality of the eighties.

Another important element in this Government's programme of social and legislative reform is the introduction of new and more enlightened legislation in relation to children. The existing legislation in this area is now badly outdated and not in keeping with current concepts in regard to the well-being of the child.

Members of the House will now be familiar with the intent and terms of the Children (Care and Protection) Bill, which has now passed Second Stage. While undoubtedly a good deal of work remains to be done on the Bill, I am determined that it should now proceed through the remaining Stages and pass into law as speedily as possible.

I intend to bring forward a Bill to amend the Adoption Act which will provide for the adoption of legitimate children who have been abandoned or deserted by their parents. These major legislative reforms mark a milestone in our society's attitude towards the care of children.

One implication of the protection of expenditure levels on a range of community services is that expenditure on institutional services, and particularly the general hospitals programme which continues to absorb about half of total non-capital resources, cannot grow in an unplanned way. We have embarked on a major development programme in our general hospital system. This has culminated in the upgrading of many existing hospitals and the building of a number of major new hospitals. However, the underlying rationale has always been that in the interests of efficiency a lesser number of larger sized hospitals was preferable to a proliferation of small hospitals. We have always envisaged that some of the older under-utilised hospitals would be phased out of the system when the new developments came on stream. Indeed, any other course could scarcely be regarded as contributing to greater efficiency. We must also continue to find the resources necessary, as we did in 1985, to fund developments like open heart surgery in the Cork Regional Hospital and renal dialysis in Limerick Regional Hospital.

In regard to psychiatric services, I recently published a report The Psychiatric Services: Planning for the Future which sets out a clear-cut plan for a community oriented psychiatric service under which the need for the large psychiatric hospitals will gradually disappear. Health boards are currently preparing their plans for the implementation of the findings of this report.

This theme was also an integral part of the strategy outlined in the national plan. In 1986 we have reached the point when it is necessary and appropriate to commence the programme of rationalising hospital facilities. The Government have decided that the first stage will involve the closure, scaling down or phasing out in 1986 of certain facilities which are demonstrably superfluous in the context of a rational, cost effective and integrated hospital system.

The hospitals due for closure in 1986 include Sir Patrick Duns; St Patrick's Infant Hospital, Blackrock; Eye, Ear and Throat Hospital, Cork; Killarney Isolation Hospital; Castlerea Mental Hospital; Roscrea District Hospital; Longford County Hospital; and St Dympna's Mental Hospital, Carlow.

May I appeal to the Minister on behalf of the Roscommon Hospital, patients and workers——

Will Deputy Leyden allow the Minister to continue?

The Minister should review that statement which he has now put on the record of the House.

Would Deputy Leyden resume his seat, please?

About 250 patients will be thrown into the street——

I have asked you to resume your seat and allow the Minister to continue.

I feel it appropriate to appeal to the Minister in this respect. He is throwing 250 patients into the street and he is putting the same number of employees out of work.

Is it not unusual in the middle of a budget speech to announce that several hospitals are to be closed down or phased out——

It is the Minister's statement and I have no control over it.

Are the health boards aware of this decision?

I will finish my speech.

The Minister has announced the closing down of a hospital which will put about 250 workers out of work——

Will you resume your seat please? You are completely disorderly. If Deputy Leyden does not resume his seat I will send for the Ceann Comhairle.

I appeal to the Minister to review his decision straight away.

Send for the Ceann Comhairle.

I am calling on the Minister to review his decision straight away.

I have sent for the Ceann Comhairle. The Deputy did not resume his seat. I appealed to the Deputy several times to resume his seat but he is continuing in a disorderly fashion. Perhaps the Deputy has a reason, but I am calling for the Ceann Comhairle.

About 250 psychiatric patients have been thrown on to the streets of County Roscommon as a result of the closure of Castlerea mental hospital.

Can we have a quorum while we wait for the Ceann Comhairle to arrive?

Notice taken that 20 Members were not present; House counted and 20 Members being present,

I have received a report from the Leas-Cheann Comhairle that Deputy Leyden has been disorderly and has refused to comply with his orders and I have no alternative but to name him.

I have been eight and a half years in this House. I appeal to the Ceann Comhairle and I apologise if I have broken the rules of the House. I was shocked by the revelations in the Minister's speech. I do not want to be thrown out of the House but I find myself in a very difficult position and needed to highlight this situation to the Minister. If I have been disorderly I apologise.

I have not before been confronted with a situation like this. I have received a report from the Leas-Cheann Comhairle, who was in the Chair. If I were to get an unqualified apology not to me but to the Leas-Cheann Comhairle I would reconsider the matter.

I have been eight and a half years in this House and I have never been thrown out. It is not my intention to be ejected from this House now as I want an opportunity next week to highlight this issue in the House. If I have broken the rules of the House in my protest, I apologise to the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for my outburst to the Minister on the basis of the situation with which I was confronted when I read the Minister's report.

I have no wish to, for the want of a better word, rub noses, but I have received a serious report from the Leas-Cheann Comhairle who sent for me. If I get an unqualified apology without any "if"——

He has done that.

I am not being harsh.

(Interruptions.)

I was sitting here and the Minister was proceeding without interruption and then the Minister announced——

I have tried to keep interruptions out of this all day.

——that eight hospitals were closing and the Deputy jumped up to say that 250 jobs in his constituency were at stake.

(Interruptions.)

A Deputy

One cannot get thrown out for arguing for one's constituency.

Deputy Leyden has apologised but it is understandable that to be told inside the House that eight hospitals will be closed down by a decision of the Government without any reference to the health boards——

Any Deputy——

It is understandable that Deputy Leyden would be upset, but he has apologised.

——has an opportunity——

(Interruptions.)

Please, Deputy O'Hanlon.

I will not go on my knees to the Chair. I apologise without reservation to the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for interrupting. I will be fair about that.

The Deputy is making an apology without reservation?

I am, but on the basis that——

Leave it at that. It must be clearly understood that I must uphold not alone the Chair but the Leas-Cheann Comhairle who was in the Chair in my absence. I am taking it that Deputy Leyden was guilty of disorderly conduct. I am accepting his apology on this occasion.

The Leas-Cheann Comhairle probably got a shock too, because Roscrea District Hospital is also affected.

(Interruptions.)

Please, Deputies. I do not want to hear any more about it. I am calling on the Minister for Health.

I was assured by the Leas-Cheann Comhairle that I had ten minutes in which to finish my speech. At the risk of provoking Deputies, I have to deal with the hospitals where the Deputy regrettably interrupted. I stated the situation in Castlerea Mental Hospital and referred to Roscrea District Hospital. Then I went on to deal with the question of Longford County Hospital. As Deputies are aware, the Midland Health Board had already decided and have gone ahead, due to the premature retirement of the hospital surgeon in that hospital, to close the hospital as from next weekend. I understand that decision has been confirmed by the health board as part of its plan at a meeting of the board yesterday. I have to inform the House of that in case there is any confusion.

One other psychiatric hospital is included, St. Dympna's Mental Hospital in Carlow. I have included two psychiatric hospitals because I am convinced that if we are to have a radical recasting of services for those with psychiatric illnesses we must change the institutionalisation of patients and develop our community care psychiatric services. Deputies are aware that this will not be a painless exercise.

On a point of order, will the Minister inform the House what he intends doing with the patients in Castlerea? Is it his intention to throw them out on the street?

That is not a point of order.

The Minister should tell the House what he intends doing with the patients.

These facilities only comprise a tiny fraction of the number of psychiatric beds in our hospitals. There will be discussions between the Department of Health and the health boards. The boards have been notified, through the chief executive officers, and discussions will follow at health board level. It is my intention to be as accommodating as possible and I should like to assure the House that patients or staff will not suffer in regard to these radical changes in the delivery of our services.

It has been happening all the time since the Minister took office.

I urge Members, when considering the delivery of modern psychiatric services to patients in such hospitals, to refrain from indulging in precipitious and ignorant attitudes and reactions of decades ago. We must change these services and the work in those hospitals. There is only one way to do that, to develop community care services.

That is an offensive statement.

With the resources that will be freed in the Western Health Board I propose to go ahead and open a major new complex for the mentally handicapped at Swinford in County Mayo. Money was allocated for that by a former Coalition Government. I propose to commission the CAT scanner at the Regional Hospital in Galway and a geriatric assessment unit at Ardkeen Hospital in Waterford. We are not reducing the quantum of cash resources to any health board.

They are being reduced in real terms.

We are transferring resources within the services and there is no other way we should go about it. These changes do not represent a departure from the well established objective of rationalising and improving services in health board areas. Their removal from the system was always an inevitable consequence of the policy adopted by successive Governments over the past 15 years but very few Ministers of Health were prepared to go ahead and change the rigid system that exists in many areas.

I should like to point out that we have 19,000 beds for acute patients and no less than 12,000 beds for psychiatric patients.

By the time the Minister is finished that number will not be half enough.

Deputy Haughey did not do anything when he was Minister for Health. He used the office to become Taoiseach.

What about Beaumont Hospital?

The only thing Deputy Haughey did as a contribution to the health services was to isssue free tooth brushes.

I did more in one week than the Minister has done in three years.

As part of the rationalisation of acute general hospital services and as part of the development of the psychiatric services we will be spending a record amount of money this year, not less than £58 million. Multi-million pound projects are proceeding at the Mater, St. James's, Cavan and Mullingar. Construction will commence almost immediately on the development of Castlebar General Hospital. I should like to assure Deputies that in regard to other priorities such as Wexford, Ardkeen and Sligo I am up and running and making every effort to bring them on stream before I leave office.

Why is it that the Minister did not open Beaumont Hospital?

In the mental handicapped service we are going ahead in the constituency adjoining Deputy Haughey's, at Belcamp, with the opening of a new 70 place day care centre for the mentally handicapped. In recent days we notified St. Michael's House of our decision in that regard. The money will be spent in 1986.

Was that money allocated for Beaumont Hospital?

That work would not have been possible if we had not reallocated resources. That will be done in spite of the extraordinary pressures being brought to bear on all of us not to do certain things if we are to make progress.

One never hears one word about the deaf. I have never received any representation in regard to those people and I never have been asked to answer a question in the House about them. I should like to point out that major development will commence at St. Mary's School for the Deaf in Dublin and that work has already commenced on the development of St. Joseph's School for the Deaf.

The Minister for Education answered that question for us.

Planning is proceeding for developments at St. Mary's School for the Blind, Merrion. We have decided to maintain and develop a health infrastructure which meets the requirements of a modern health service. With regard to the management of the health services I should like to state that while the strategy currently adopted is sufficient to address the immediate problems in the health services, the recessionary conditions with which we have had to contend in recent years have, I think, brought to the surface a number of broader issues. The acceptance that we have to live within defined resource constraints has induced a more questioning approach to health service management, both centrally and at local level and has highlighted the need to develop a more professional approach to administration in the health services.

The crux of the matter is that the public purse does not have the capacity to satisfy simultaneously all demands being made on it. Inevitably this leads into the need to establish priorities, to identify new and better ways of pursuing our objectives and implementing changes in policy as appropriate. In the health services we are not dealing with a simple or stationary system. We are managing a complex system which is constantly faced with new problems and which also has to absorb new methods of dealing with both new and old problems. The times call for a dynamic and responsive approach supported by efficient management and information systems. The systems were almost devoid of real information for years. It has been breaking my heart to get audited returns from the health boards for 1982, when I was not even Minister for Health, and for 1983 to try to find out what is going on. I have said that I want to change the system for the better despite political and profesional vested interests who want no change except to represent their own interests perpetually, incessantly and adamantly and to force the political parties into delivering them whether they merit delivery or not. I make no apology for trying to change that and I am convinced that if I get the ordinary, sane co-operation of this House where people do not work themselves into a frenzy over particular issues——

The Minister is working himself into a frenzy.

Is the Minister going to close the voluntary hospitals?

Deputy Haughey knows how trenchant we both can be in our reactions. However, I am convinced that we can change a great deal in the health services. They are quite outstanding at present. We have a sum of £1,200 million in cash resources this year, £38 million more than last year. There will be no cutback but I am not going to waste one penny of the money. I am convinced that we can make major changes. We have a very good health service which I intend to project and to develop in the direction in which it should be going and not where I found it when I took over in 1983 when it was moribund, rigid, unresponsive and incapable of delivering any change.

I am sure you and I are equally upset——

I did not hear what you said.

You must be upset that Roscrea District Hospital is closing.

I am in the Chair, Roscrea has no bearing on the statement.

It concerns you.

Deputy Ahern to continue.

The statistics in the Minister's speech were interesting, especially in relation to Sir Patrick Dun's, St. Patrick's Infant Hospital, Blackrock, The Eye and Ear Hospital, Cork, the Killarney Isolation Hospital, Castlerea Mental Hospital, Roscrea District Hospital, Longford County Hospital and Saint Dympna's Mental Hospital. No plans seem to have been made for the future of the patients of these hospitals. Deputy Leyden made the point that only 45 of the 200 patients in the hospital in his area knew where they were going. The staff in these hospitals have no information and it is understandable why people are upset and concerned.

After the budget yesterday, people calculated the effect it would have on their lives. However, it is obvious that any increase in allowances will be clawed back by increases in indirect taxation, petrol, car taxes and the loss of the £100 child allowance. When children continue full time education after 18 years there is no allowance for them. The Minister did not refer to this but the people involved do not gain in children's allowances because there is no allowance for those over 18. People who try to educate their children lose their tax-free allowance as a result of the budget and get nothing in return.

The Government came into office with the avowed aim of reducing borrowing, arresting the unemployment spiral and with a programme of social legislation which was to make us the envy of any progressive democrat. During their time in office, there has been a massive increase in borrowing, 250,000 people are unemployed and we have the greatest collection of first edition reports which this country has ever seen. The industrial and employment shambles, as well as the deep demoralisation of the nation, is a mirror image of the political ineptitude of the Coalition and their inability to do anything right. Even children playing monopoly know that one must invest to build but there has been a 17 per cent reduction in investment since 1981 for the simple reason that risk capital is so heavily taxed that it is easier and more profitable to pump money into Government gilts than to invest it in the community or the country. Thus, industrial production is in serious decline because funds are being moved out of the country on account of the low level of economic activity here or they are lying inactive in safe financial coffers. More and more funds are being invested outside the country because of the major loopholes in the EMS.

There can be no increase in employment unless individuals and the big companies are willing to risk their capital. Last year the top 40 publicly quoted companies in The Irish Times company list made no overall contribution to employment, in fact there was a net loss of 436 jobs. Again, last year, two-thirds of the job losses came from companies trimming employment. I know there is a strong link between management, profitability and employment but there must also be worthwhile incentives for those who are willing to put their money working for the country. I also believe very strongly that it is long past time for switching from capital incentives for new companies coming into this country to employment incentives, where grants or subsidies are given on the basis of the number of people actually employed rather than handling out massive sums of public money in the hope that some day a particular company will be good enough to increase their employment. In spite of the success of many IDA projects, I remain unconvinced that capital grants are as good for the needs of our young population as grants tied in with increased employment.

One of the things that the Coalition will be angrily remembered for is that by their financial naivete and bungling ineptitude, they have created a new social group — the fifth estate. The people in the fifth estate have houses but can barely meet the repayments, have jobs but can barely make ends meet after the savage tax take, have good education but cannot get jobs, have valuable skills and talents but cannot find any outlet for them, have enterprise and ambition but are not given any encouragement. They are at one and the same time the haves and the have nots. The demoralised citizens of the fifth estate will note carefully what action the Minister for Finance took in his budget yesterday. Make no mistake about it, when the time comes the people of the fifth estate will tear the Coalition apart to regain a future that has been seriously put at risk by Government negligence.

We all know that we have below average incomes and living standards but above average unemployment, taxation and borrowing. We must offer worthwhile incentives to those who are willing to risk their capital in providing employment. We must show compassion for the fifth estate who can only educate their children at great personal sacrifice, who can barely afford to run cars which are essential for their work, who can rarely have meat on the table because they cannot afford it, who can hardly afford to cloth their teenage children as they would like because the Government increased prices by more tax.

The budget is meant to outline the financial projections for the year ahead, the economic outlook and how the Government will tackle the major problems. Unfortunately, yesterday's budget avoided the major issues. Despite the promise in 1982 that the national debt would be reversed, controlled and brought down to manageable levels, it is higher than ever. When the Coalition came into office they tried to say that it was not the overall figures that bothered them but the percentage. That worked for two years but it will not work any longer. They said they would halt and reverse the levels of unemployment, although it has increased by 70,000 and continues to go up. Last month we had the highest increase ever and from the unofficial reports it will again increase this month.

While yesterday's budget had small if welcome increases in the bands and tax allowances, they were tiny for those in the middle income group and are totally eliminated when measured against the increases in the goods these people have to provide — cars, petrol and household goods. It would be wrong to say that anybody will be better off as a result of this budget in six months' time. Like last year, people will see that what the Minister says does not tie in with the facts.

This morning I listened to the Minister for Finance on the "John Bowman Show" being questioned by telephone by the women of this country. It could be clearly seen that these women had worked out their figures and knew exactly what the budget meant for them. People are so hard up and are finding it so difficult to make ends meet that they calculate to the last penny just what the budget means to them. This did not happen in the past. The people are very quick to realise when the Government are trying to mislead them by saying that there is a huge switch from the PAYE sector to insurance companies, the banks, the speculators and the private investors.

Is £120 million — £200 million in a full year — a small switch?

Does the Deputy think the banks will pay this £120 million?

In the weeks ahead the Deputy will see that these charges will be passed on to the consumers. Mortgage rates will be hit and bank charges will increase. The banks will continue to make profits and invest them outside the country. If the Government really wanted to do something in this area why did they not repartriate foreign profits?

Does the Deputy want to nationalise banks?

There is no need to nationalise banks, although the Government almost did that last year when they bailed a bank out. The banks can hardly complain this year when the Government pumped in millions of pounds of taxpayers' money to help them out of trouble. The fact is that it is the consumer who will have to pay these charges and the bank profits will be the same this year as they were last year and the year before. Time will tell. In six months' time the Deputy will realise what I am saying is true.

While the budget played with these pluses and minuses it did nothing to help overcome our major problem — to create employment and to solve the unemployment problem. We should try to help those people who are worried, angry, frustrated and demoralised because they cannot get jobs, people who are on the breadline and who cannot do more than put bread on the table and, maybe, pay the rent. An increase of £1.60 a week for an unemployed person who has to pay rent, provide food and clothing for himself, his wife and children has no value in 1986. An increase of £1.60, even with inflation running at 3 per cent or 4 per cent, will not help these people maintain the same standard of living they enjoyed in 1985.

Statistics show that the people on the lowest income group spend a higher proportion of their money on food and clothing. They cannot survive on the miserly increases for which the Minister for Social Welfare said they should be grateful. People on social welfare want to work. They want a Government which will put money into job creation, and which will encourage investors to take their money which they have invested all around the world and put it into risk capital here to try to raise our economy. These people do not want a hand-out. They accept the Minister's hand-out only because they need to survive and have a duty to their children, but what they really want is work.

What have this Government done? There has been an 18 per cent fall-off in investment since 1981. Our biggest industry is agriculture, but if one were to read yesterday's budget statement one would get the impression that there was something wrong with the word. Again the construction industry has been hammered because the money is being pulled out of the capital programme. There are thousands of people walking the streets in the Twenty-six Counties and nobody cares.

The Minister says the Government are spending £1 billion on social welfare. He says there will be more medical referees, doctors, inspectors and assessors to make sure there are no fiddles. If this Government created employment, that £1 billion would be reduced and only people on invalidity and disability benefits would need to be helped. If this were done we would not need inspectors.

A great deal of the £8 billion which has been provided in the Estimates is being spent on totally inadequate hand-outs. If that money were spent trying to stimulate the economy I would say that yesterday's budget was a good one. But will one job be created as a result of that budget, except for the medical referees who will haunt the people who do not turn up for their disability benefit because they are in hospital, or assessors who are trying to catch those who are trying to fiddle the system?

I have no time for people who try to fiddle the tax system but this Government must stop calling people with money rogues or gangsters, saying they are conning the system and so on. We should encourage those people to invest here. There are almost 250,000 people out of work and the Minister should be convincing investors to invest here. Over the next four or five weeks the Minister should do something like this before he introduces the Finance Bill.

Some years ago Jack Lynch said that no Government should be in power if the unemployment level was over 100,000. At that time everyone in Fine Gael agreed and said Fianna Fáil should be thrown out if that happened. Now the figure is 250,000 and nobody seems to give a damn. Everyone ignores it. The Coalition parties when in opposition used to get into a frenzy over the current budget deficit. They said the country was going down the tube and that the international bankers would come in to liquidate us. The State owes £21 billion now and nobody cares.

My view is that this is utter hypocrisy and it sickens me to see the biggest social evil, unemployment being ignored. The Minister is playing with £100 here and £100 there and the people are about to revolt. The Minister spoke about dramatic increases in the tax system. Three or four times yesterday he tried to convince us that he had brought in a major realignment of the tax bands and that he had altered the tax system in a fantastic way. He did almost nothing. As long as we continue to play with the PAYE and PRSI systems the situation will continue to be in a mess and the PAYE taxpayers will continue to pay more. No matter how much tinkering is being done with the PAYE system, the situation remains the same.

Until some Government take the five reports from the Income Taxation Commission and have the guts to do something meaningful about them we will continue to have the present system. I do not accept what the Minister said this morning: that the members on that commission got their figures wrong. They did very good work, particularly in the fifth report. I see much merit in some of their proposals for an expenditure tax. It is no good closing every loophole on the self-employed, on the PAYE sector and on business people. There are other sectors and the only way to catch them is to have an expenditure tax. People have not considered fully all that could be done with such a tax. When I studied accountancy 15 years ago I thought it was the only way to close all the loopholes and I am still of that opinion. The officials in the Department should look at the recommendations. It is easy to say that we would not get the money but the point is that we do not get the money from those sectors now. Everyone has to buy goods and commodities. The recommendation in question is worthy of examination.

I have mentioned already that we spend £1 billion on unemployment benefit and assistance. We also spend from £600 million to £700 million on a wide range of courses under the aegis of AnCO, the National Manpower Service, YEA, IPA, IMI and schemes under the aegis of the VEC and the Department of Education. All of these courses are training people and are educating them in courses that lead to nothing. Eventually they all lead to emigration but not one of those courses helps to prepare people for that possibility. At the moment many young people are going away unprepared and are suffering hardship and people from the Irish clubs who visit this country confirm that.

When will the Government produce a White Paper on manpower policy? Last year I raised the matter but the House on that occasion did not divide on a Private Members' motion. Will we continue the situation where young people are leaving school with no hope for the future? We are trying to fool them by providing courses but that is not the solution. If the £600 million or £700 million were given to them to allow them to set up small businesses or co-operative movements it might be worthwhile. There are a number of worthwhile projects proceeding at the moment; for instance, there is the case of the Liffey Trust where warehouses have been obtained at low rent. They have been renovated and young people with apprenticeship skills are encouraged to start up small businesses making crafts and furniture.

It is not good enough to give people £30 per week on work experience programmes merely to file letters. These people are then let go after a short time and they are worse off than ever. Some people have been given £60 to clear graveyards but if they were given that money and the proper advice to set up an enterprise for themselves it would be of some benefit. I have talked to many people who have been on four or five courses conducted by AnCO or the YEA and they are fed up with what is happening. This Government have been talking for three years about a manpower policy. The last manpower policy was initiated in 1965 when AnCO and the National Manpower Service were established. Their brief then was to train people for all the jobs then available. That is totally unrealistic today when we have 250,000 unemployed. The policy is outdated and is a waste of money. If any cuts in public expenditure are to be made they should be done in that area. We need a White Paper urgently because the present set-up has created unbelievable disillusionment throughout the country.

Yesterday it was sad to see the areas where cutbacks were made. I do not know why this Government continue to cut back on the capital programme while maintaining other less essential services. The Minister for Health asked me to name one and I did so. The capital programme has always been used to try to stimulate investment and employment. We must ask what will happen to the construction industry. We have a small economy that is open to the pressures and the forces of the rest of Europe. If we do not have a capital programme with the State giving help in respect of investment and construction, how can we expect anybody else to do it? There has been a reduction in this sector of 18 per cent since 1981.

The Minister for Health told us about opening some hospitals. He has not done that. A sum of £37.5 million has been spent on Beaumont Hospital and it costs £1.5 million for security and heating costs. Yet, no real effort is being made to open it. It has been suggested that a few consultants in the Richmond Hospital are the cause of the problem but that is not true. It is not the reason for the slow down in the development work at the Mater Hospital or in St. James' Hospital. The Minister tells us about the new developments here and there but he will not open the hospitals that are finished. There is a shortage of beds in hospitals.

I gather the Minister was attacking the medical consultants even though he said it in a roundabout way. He said the services they wish to provide were not necessary. Some 3,000 people are on the waiting list of the Mater Hospital. Hundreds of people are waiting for heart operations and the hospital is packed to capacity. The phase just finished should have been opened years ago. Beaumont Hospital is locked up and at Blanchardstown the work is going ahead at half speed. The Minister tells us he cannot do any more but I say that if he opened a few hospitals he would provide a better service. If he put more money into the hospitals already built he could move two hospitals from the city centre to Beaumont. Then Jervis Street Hospital could be used as a drug centre and St. Laurence's Hospital could be used for geriatric patients. This was suggested five years ago but the Minister will not do that. He gets uptight and excited and he raises his blood pressure thinking he has to fight the entire country but all people want to do is to help. It is a strange way to carry on.

Public service pay forms part of my brief. I have not made life difficult for the Minister for the Public Service because I accept the difficulty of paying for the public service. I accept that every 1 per cent increase is a huge amount in money terms. On the first day the Dáil resumed in October we asked him to negotiate with the workers and the unions across a table rather than negotiate through the media. I think he and the Minister for Education have now learned their lesson. They realise now that they cannot browbeat people and that they must negotiate. The Minister's long nights of anguish and negotiation would not have been necessary if he had realised earlier that people will no longer tolerate being dictated to. However, it is good to note that he has had to rid himself of his arrogant approach.

I raise the point at this time because it is so important in the context of the budget. It appears from what I heard before coming into the House that there are no negotiations in progress with the teachers' unions and that the Government will introduce an amendment in the House on Thursday next in relation to the arbitration award which was for the payment of 5 per cent on 1 September and a further 5 per cent on 1 March. At the time the arbitrator made his decision he said that he has taken full account of economic circumstances. The Minister wishes the teachers to accept phased payment of the award. I spoke to some of the representatives of the teachers yesterday and I have spoken to hundreds of them in the past weeks and my understanding is that they are prepared to talk about phased payment but that the bone of contention is the issue of restrospection.

We have had 30 year's experience of the conciliation and arbitration system, a system that has been beneficial to the State. Down through the years public servants always got the lowest increases, the minimum levels of the pay agreements or of any other awards. They had to use the system of conciliation and arbitration to try to catch up with what was the position outside. That was not the proper way to have to deal with the matter because, infortunately, I know from my experience of talking with leaders of the trade union movement that they regard the round increases as being available anyway and then begin seeking ways of achieving special increases. Some of these people are beginning to realise that they could be much better off by not having a conciliation and arbitration procedure but by going to the Labour Court which would have an arm that would deal generally with the public service. In that way, it is contended, the increases would be paid when they should be paid and not a few years later. That system, too, would be far better for the State because it is difficult and harmful for the State when an arbitration award that would cost several hundreds of millions of pounds is made. It is said that to pay the teachers' award would cost £110 million, but the retrospection is the outstanding issue according to the teachers, though the Ministers concerned would say the money is the whole issue.

Therefore, to avoid teachers' strikes, disruption of examinations and so on, I am calling on the Minister to sit down again this week with the teachers and to reach an agreement. Perhaps the Minister believes he has a safe majority, but I regard the issue as being much more important. It will not benefit any of us if we reach the stage next week that the Government will bring in an amendment on which there will be a vote and that the teachers, because of the Government's majority will then find themselves in a campaign backed by the Public Services Committee of Congress plus the total membership of their own associations. Some say the teachers do not have a mandate for what they are doing. I would not agree. On a cold December's day they were able to bring 25,000 people to Croke Park. That figure represented about five-eights of their entire membership.

If the Government are prepared to talk to the teachers this weekend they should be able to bring in an amendment next week that will be agreed. The solution may be to phase further the payments but to pay in total the amount due by way of retrospection. There was an item in yesterday's Budget Statement which did not receive any subsequent attention. The Minister for Finance, to his credit, told us that those teachers who are on pension or those who are about to go on pension will benefit from the full payment immediately. Therefore, it is only a matter of moving from there to giving in on the retrospection. The C and A report is binding. Various Ministers from time to time have introduced amendments in respect of awards but an arbitration award relating to teachers has never been amended in this way. The Minister should remember that when a Fianna Fáil Government rejected the proposals of an arbitration finding on behalf of teachers in, I think, 1948 the teachers caused a major battle for the party in the subsequent general election. Fianna Fáil lost that election.

This is not relevant.

There will not be much point in my asking for permission to raise the issue on Tuesday. The Minister must act this weekend. The teachers are willing to participate in negotiations in an effort to find a solution to the problem.

It is regrettable that the whole matter of the huge sums of money meted out by this economy to major investors coming in here is not tackled in this budget, apart from being addressed in a limited way. The change referred to yesterday will mean that in future IDA grants to companies coming into the State must not be used afterwards by way of the recipients trying to claim back tax allowances. We have been operating the ridiculous machinery whereby the State were granting tax allowances in respect of moneys that were paid by the State in the first instance.

If this Government do not change the whole scenario in respect of IDA grants, Fianna Fáil will act in this area when returned to power. We will change the whole position in regard to IDA grants based on capital and concentrate on labour. In an economy in which 18 per cent of the population is unemployed, the present position is incredible. In my talks with the representations of the various trade unions I hear time and again of how the introduction of a new machine on foot of, say, a £100,000 grant from the Government caused the laying off eventually of eight workers. We must gear our efforts to creating work. It is ridiculous that the IDA would not give consideration to the number of jobs linked to any grant that is given. There should be a clear link between IDA grants and the number of jobs involved. No grant should be made solely on the basis of the modernisation of machinery for the purpose of sustaining markets abroad. If we continue on that road we will have the best machinery in the world but no jobs. For years people in the trade union movement who have been the victims of cutbacks in terms of redundancies, liquidations and so on, have been pointing out that, while the IDA do a tremendous job in bringing foreign based industry to the country, the capital grants system will result in a continuing reduction in employment. Grants should be paid on reality and not on projections that may never be fulfilled. The grants should be on the basis of, say, £20,000 or £50,000 per job provided. They should not be paid, as is the present case, for no purpose.

The ICTU in their statement today expressed their concern at the cutbacks in the Estimates yesterday. Some of these cuts, especially in the Estimate for the Environment, will lead to unemployment. Is it not a fact that some of the schemes for short-term employment by local authorities will now have to be cut back? Already the local authorities are aware that they will have to reduce expenditure in 1986. In the case of Dublin Corporation the cutback is severe.

Debate adjourned.
Top
Share