asked the Minister for Labour whether the discussions envisaged by the Programme for National Recovery on the reform of industrial relations have yet commenced; and if he will make a statement on the likely timetable.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Industrial Relations Reform Discussions.
28.
I have written to both the FUE and the ICTU inviting them to take part in discussions at an early date on industrial relations reform.
The Programme for National Recovery states that it will be the aim of the parties to conclude the discussions as soon as possible.
What working method does the Minister envisage? Does he envisage study groups being established or how will people proceed henceforth?
Initially, I hope to meet both sides. I have met them on numerous occasions in recent months and at least once on this issue. Bearing in mind what occurred on previous occasions, I should like to have a small delegation of perhaps two or three nominated along with a senior official of my Department who is involved in this area. I would hope they would comprise a working group to undertake an initial examination, perhaps encompassing all areas, and then ascertain where we should go from there. Later on it might be necessary to break that down into an examination of particular areas. We must first establish clear guidelines on the total sphere of the review.
Will the Minister be putting proposals to the social partners or will his officials be there simply on the basis of listening and wondering what will be coming up?
I have almost completed a very comprehensive document which I hope to put on the table at the appropriate time. I do not intend doing so at the first meeting; I do not intend to do it that way. Certainly, within the working group, my departmental officials will have a very comprehensive document to put on the table for discussion at an early date.
Will the proposals the Minister will be putting to the social partners deal with questions such as unofficial strikes, the holding of secret ballots before industrial action is taken and disputes by disgruntled minorities against a majority decision to accept a peace settlement?
Almost all the issues raised by the Deputy will be incorporated in my discussion document. For instance, it will cover provision for rule books, the conduct of secret ballots before industrial action is taken, provision for placing restrictions on the granting of injunctions, the withdrawal of immunity from workers, all of those things. At this stage I consider them all appropriate for discussion. I might have personal fixed views on an awful lot of them but, for the purpose of making progress, I will put all of the documents in for discussion initially.
Will the Minister now turn his attention to the question of the timetable? In the days immediately following publication of the plan he suggested a tentative timetable to the House. Now that he has had some time in which to reflect, when does he envisage the exercise being concluded?
I would hope it would entail a period of no longer than six months. So much of the work has already been done I would hazard a guess that the views could be formulated within two to three months but we must make allowance for the fairly lengthy representations that may be forthcoming from each side. That fact must be acknowledged. On commencement it must be acknowledged that there could not be more divergent views on a number of the issues involved. I would envisage a maximum period of six months.
Given the speed with which this Government seem to be disintegrating in the past few weeks, would the Minister be well advised to get on with it while he still has a job?
I know that with the support of Deputy Birmingham I will be around sufficiently long to see this Bill through.