asked the Minister for the Environment the reason he is not prepared to make available the recommendations of the interim board of An Foras Forbartha.
78.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - An Foras Forbartha.
49.
asked the Minister for the Environment the date on which he proposes to close down An Foras Forbartha; and the plans he has for those staff who have not accepted voluntary redundancy, or who are not being redeployed at that time.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 49 and 78 together.
Proposals for the provision of essential research and related services provided until now by An Foras Forbartha and for winding up the company are receiving detailed consideration. While I am not yet in a position to indicate what the detailed arrangements may be, I am satisfied that significant savings can be achieved while at the same time keeping essential services going. Decisions on these matters will take account of the report prepared by the directors of the institute and of all other relevant considerations. It would not be appropriate, in these circumstances, to publish the board's report. I will ensure, however, that full details of the alternative arrangements decided on will be made available as soon as possible after the Government have decided these. Detailed proposals for redeployment cannot be drawn up pending decision on the functions to be retained, relocated or discontinued and the relevant staffing requirements.
Is the Minister not aware that he at least conveyed the impression that he would be prepared to make public or to make available the recommendations of the interim board at the time when they were submitted to him so that the staff of the foras and other interested parties could perhaps make helpful suggestions as to how a re-organised or refurbished foras might operate? Would the Minister not consider that this might be helpful in what is presumably his commitment to see the type of work being carried out by the foras continued in the best possible and most cost-effective way?
I did not indicate on 21 October that I would publish the recommendations but I did say that the details concerning the rearrangements would have to be made public. This is only fair so far as the employees are concerned. The interim board have submitted a report to me which is being considered. It is a fairly hefty report. I understand that discussions went on between the board and the interested parties, including the trade unions. The trade unions involved have also come to see me and they made a submission, asking that I should take it into consideration before making any announcement. I promised I would do so.
Despite the very peremptory way in which the staff of the foras and the general public heard the announcement of its intended abolition, the staff there have endeavoured to operate in a very constructive manner in relation to this extraordinary decision. It would obviously be beneficial if they had available to them, or even to their staff representative on a quasi-confidential basis, the main thrust of the report and recommendations so as to see whether they could make suggestions which would help the foras to live within a reduced budget and still provide optimum services. Would the Minister consider at least doing that?
The thrust of what the Deputy says is fairly reasonable. When consideration of the board's report and other matters has been completed the board could let the staff know what is proposed and how it is proposed to relocate and redeploy or retain. An announcement by me might not be the best way to handle it. The job will be done efficiently and there will be fair play for all concerned. Big savings have to be made. Nobody likes abolishing anything but I am satisfied that there are more cost-effective ways of doing it. Judging by the report I have received from the interim board, those savings can be effected. Certain consultations have to take place with other agencies regarding redeployment and so on. I should like these to be completed before going to the employees and telling them precisely what is intended for them.
I am sure the Minister is aware that one of the greatest difficulties for a Government once they have announced their decision to do something is to announce a change in that intention or decision, even if they might be disposed to make that change subsequently. In that context would it not be difficult if the Minister announced his intentions, based on the recommendations, when other suggestions might be made by the staff following his announcement which might be more beneficial? The Minister would have the difficulty, which has obviously been experienced by some of his colleagues of late, of opposing changes when other Members of the Cabinet might be disposed to accept them.
The Government's decision in this regard will not be altered.
We heard that last night, too.
It was a response to that Government decision that the interim board brought their report to me. This Government are not for moving and this Minister is not for turning.
It was another lady who said that.
I am calling the next question. I have given Deputy Boland quite a lot of latitude.
There are only two questions.
Very well. A brief supplementary question, please.
The Minister has announced the abolition of the foras as from the beginning of next year, there is no provision for its existence after 31 December. On the basis that not all of the staff will have been redeployed or will have taken voluntary redundancy within the next five weeks, what will happen to those staff? Will the foras be abolished on 31 December or will that date be changed?
The foras will remain in existences as a legal entity until the new arrangements have been implemented. It will then be possible to liquidate the company under the Companies Acts. That is the way I would like to see it happen. It will not be possible to retain all the staff. The Deputy is quite right.
After 31 December there is no provision for the staff who remain to continue to be paid. There is no provision in the Minister's Vote for a grant-in-aid to the foras. What will happen to the staff who remain, whose future has not been decided? How will they be paid?
That is receiving urgent attention so that the Government decision can be complied with. There is a subhead in the Department's Vote for research and development and, as I indicated on a previous occasion, I should like to strengthen the environmental division of the Department. I hope to be able to do something about this matter in the very near future for the reasons put forward by the Deputy.
Is that not doing a little turn?
The decision stands.