asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement regarding his recent talks with representatives of the ICTU, FUE, IFA and representatives of the banks and financial institutions.
7.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Economic Objectives.
5.
asked the Taoiseach when he will make a comprehensive statement on the Government's economic objectives, their proposals for expenditure and taxation and their proposals for the protection of the deprived sections of the community.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 5 and 7 together.
The Government's economic objectives covering the period to end-1990 are set out clearly in the Programme for National Recovery published on 9 October, 1987 and laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas on that day.
The Government, the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, the Federated Union of Employers, the Confederation of Irish Industry, the Construction Industry Federation, the Irish Farmers Association, Macra na Feirme and the Irish Co-operative Organisation Society have drafted that programme which involves the creation of a fiscal, exchange rate and monetary climate conducive to economic growth, including in particular the stabilisation of the National Debt to GNP ratio at an Exchequer Borrowing Requirement level of between 5 per cent and 7 per cent of GNP by 1990; movement towards greater equity and fairness in the tax system, including in particular income tax reductions to the cumulative value of £225 million over the next three years; diminishing or removing social inequities in our society, including in particular maintaining the overall value of social welfare benefits and within the resources available considering special provision for greater increases for those receiving the lowest payments and intensification of practical measures to generate increased job opportunities on a sectoral basis. As regards talks with representatives of the banks and financial institutions I and the Minister for Finance met representatives of the major financial institutions on 24 September, 1987.
The meeting was a reflection of the growing importance of the financial services sector and of a desire on the part of the Government to work together with the financial sector to increase national prosperity.
The themes of the meeting were investment in Ireland and how it might be encouraged; interest and exchange rates; the financial consequences of the move to a single European market and the management of the national debt and progress in establishing the international financial services centre in Dublin.
Would the Taoiseach agree that nothing he has said following the publication of the public service pay deal, which he calls a plan, and that nothing in what either he nor the Minister for Finance said yesterday, gives any clear view of the Government's intentions in relation to the protection of deprived sections of our community and that neither is there any clear idea of the Government's intentions in relation to taxation? Will the Taoiseach agree also that to present an intention of reducing taxation or of giving tax reliefs amounting to £225 million over three years is a pretty puny effort for a Government composed of people who two years ago found the return of over £200 million to the taxpayer in one year to be inadequate?
The provision made in the Programme for National Recovery has been hammered out in agreement with all the social partners and is regarded by them as reasonable. So far as the Government have taken any criticism in regard to that matter from the economic establishment, it is that they should not have given any tax concessions at all. However, as the Deputy knows it is the Government's intention to endeavour to progress towards taxation reform as economic circumstances permit. That is what is attempted in the Programme for National Recovery.
The Taoiseach has just said that this agreement was hammered out with the social partners and that they found it reasonable. One or two of the social partners do not now feel that it is as entirely reasonable as they thought when they were signing it but that is a matter for another question. Could the Taoiseach indicate whether any of the working papers that were put before that conference will be made available to the House?
That would be neither necessary nor desirable. What is put before the House and before the people is the programme as finally hammered out. A lot of the suggestions and submissions were made in confidence and it would be most unusual to make any such papers public. If the Deputy were fair about this he would accept that it was a major achievement by the social partners and by the Government to be able to reconcile all their conflicting interests and get support and agreement for a programme for economic recovery. The Deputy is less than generous in not giving some credit to the Government but he should accept that the social partners deserve commendation for being able to reach agreement on this programme.
Would the Taoiseach agree——
I am now calling Deputy Mac Giolla who has tabled a question on this matter.
Does the Taoiseach agree that the publication of the Book of Estimates makes the proposals in the plan for national recovery less likely to be achieved particularly in relation to social welfare, education and job creation?
I do not agree. The two documents are part of the Government's overall fiscal and economic strategy. The programme aims at economic recovery. This Government see sound public finances as an essential basis for economic recovery. We need the fiscal improvement which is envisaged by the publication of the Book of Estimates side by side with the positive measures for sectoral development in the national programme.
Deputy Barry Desmond.
Just one more question. What is the status of the plan if the trade unions or some other social partner do not endorse it?
The programme has been publically endorsed and accepted by all of the social partners with the exception of one farming organisation, so that question does not arise.
Deputy Barry Desmond.
(Interruptions.)
I have called Deputy Barry Desmond.
Does the Taoiseach regard the 1988 Estimates as published, as an integral part of the programme signed by the social partners?
I have said that. It is an integral part of the Government's approach. The programme for economic recovery and the Book of Estimates are both integral parts of the Government's economic and fiscal strategy.
Will the Taoiseach agree that some of the social partners now seem to be less than enchanted and find that some of the agreement did not mean what they thought it meant? Would the Taoiseach agree that there is a difference between negotiations with the social partners and the debate we have in this House? My question about the working papers has been answered by the Taoiseach in a way which I can only conclude is less than properly deferential to this House. Would the Taoiseach agree that when this House is about to carry out its proper business in the examination of Government expenditure plans, we should have available to us at least the same information that people outside of this House have had in conspiring with the Government to make an agreement that will be paid for by the rest of us?
I reject the word "conspiring" and the Deputy might find it helpful when we come to discuss the Book of Estimates next week, to approach any of the social partners who can help him. I am certain they will be glad to give him any views they wish to offer him as Leader of the Opposition.
(Interruptions.)
Order, please.
The Taoiseach has not answered my question.
Deputies will have an opportunity to debate this matter in greater detail next week.
I have asked the Taoiseach whether the working papers that were before that conference and before those meetings would be made available to the House. Does the Taoiseach consider it an insult to this House that such papers used in negotiating something which this House will have to discuss should not be made available?
That is an absurd position for the Deputy to take.
I will hear a brief question for Deputies McDowell, McCartan and De Rossa and then I am passing on to the next question.
Is the Taoiseach aware of trade union officials' recent utterances to the effect that the national plan, as he calls it, and the Estimates recently published are entirely separate matters? Will he take this occasion to say that that is not the case? Likewise, will he indicate that the trade union officials are correct in saying that the Taoiseach's Government have given a commitment to achieving the job targets set out in that programme?
It would be a pity if the maturity and responsibility displayed by the social partners were not to be reflected in the approach of Deputies in this House.
With regard to the statements by trade union leaders and by any of the other social partners, they are at liberty to make any statements they wish. I am not pre-empting their positions in any way. What I said was that the programme and the Book of Estimates are an integral part of the Government's economic and fiscal policy.
In view of the Taoiseach's statement that he considers the cutbacks announced yesterday to be an integral part of the plan that was agreed with the social partners, can he say whether he disclosed, during the course of the negotiations leading to the plan, the detail of those cutbacks? Were the social partners advised during the negotiations of what the Government had in mind by way of the cutbacks that were announced yesterday?
There was no particular disclosure of the Estimates. The duty of the Government would be to produce the Book of Estimates first of all to Dáil Éireann. We did that. We would be very rightly criticised if we had disclosed any details of the Book of Estimates to anybody before they were published in Dáil Éireann. However, it is no secret to anybody that for the past six months the Government were engaged in a particular exercise designed to produce a Book of Estimates which would achieve substantial reductions in Government expenditure. Everybody knew that that was what we were doing all through the summer. That is what we have done and that is what we produced to Dáil Éireann.
Does the Taoiseach propose to bring the economic programme to the Floor of the House to enable it to be debated and either endorsed or rejected by the House?
That has not as yet been envisaged but I would not rule out any reasonable proposal from the Opposition parties for any debate on economic matters. Perhaps it could be, with your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, debated in conjunction with the Book of Estimates debate next week. That is a matter the Whips can discuss.
(Limerick East): Would the Taoiseach agree that he seduced the social partners into acting against their own interests, their members' interests and the national interest? Does he now appreciate that they are squirming in his embrace.
(Interruptions.)
I could suggest that the Deputy try to keep the party clean.
(Interruptions.)
In relation to discussion with financial institutions, has the Taoiseach sought the approval of the Central Bank for the use of reserved funds of approximately £160 million to fund the enforced redundancy of 16,000 public servants?
First of all, there will be no enforced redundancies. Part of the programme stipulates that redundancies in the public service should be on a voluntary basis in so far as possible, and if there is to be any change in that it will be negotiated with the social partners.
What about the Central Bank?
Second, as the Deputy having been a Member of a former Government would fully understand, any discussions between the Government or the Minister for Finance and the Central Bank would, of necessity, be confidential. But I do not think the Deputy need be particularly worried about the rumour.
(Interruptions.)
I am calling Question No. 8 in the name of Deputy Alan Dukes.
Confidentiality aside, would the Taoiseach confirm, as I have not received a reply to my question, that on page V of the Book of Estimates the subsequent arrangements referred to deal with that matter and that it is extraordinary that £160 million for pay and pensions is not reflected in any of the Votes as published yesterday and that this in fact is probably the biggest stroke of all——
The Deputy seems to be imparting information rather than seeking it.
It is not for nothing that the Deputy is known as one of the most mischievous men in Irish politics.
I am interested only in the truth. The Taoiseach has not denied my assertion.
If I were to go around denying all the fictitious accusations the Deputy makes, I would have a full time occupation. All the provisions for pay and pensions are included in the Book of Estimates.
Redundancy is not, and the Taoiseach knows that.
Please do not adopt these bullying tactics.
(Interruptions.)
Where is the £160 million.
The Deputy has sought information. He should now listen.
The Minister for Finance has already indicated that the full information in regard to the provisions for redundancy will be announced in the budget. As a matter of fact, it would be impossible for us to do otherwise at the moment as we do not know the extent to which voluntary redundancies will be taken up.
It is a bit early to fiddle the Estimates.