Vol. 379 No. 6
asked the Minister for Justice if, in relation to the present strike in the prison service, he will give a mediator the power to make recommendations that might form the basis of a settlement between the Prison Officers' Association and his Department; if a condition of such mediation would be that the recommendation must stay within the 1988 budget allocation for the public service; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
31.
asked the Minister for Justice the present position regarding the dispute with the Prison Officers' Association; the discussions he has had with the Prison Officers' Association; if he intends to take any new initiatives to secure a solution to the dispute; the arrangements which are being made for the running of prisons in the event of an all-out strike; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
38.
asked the Minister for Justice the demands of the prison officers in relation to the new roster which has now caused the withdrawal of labour in the prison service.
45.
asked the Minister for Justice if he will make a statement outlining the steps he proposes to take to ensure a speedy and amicable solution to the prison officers' dispute; if he will agree to an intervention by any mutually acceptable third party to facilitate a resolution of the matters in dispute; and the steps he is taking to ensure full security and safety for the public.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 12, 31 and 38 as well as Priority Question No. 45 together.
In response to Private Notice Questions on 23 March, I outlined to the House the background to the present dispute. The position, briefly, is that the Government decided, in making the 1988 financial provision for the prison service, that the overtime provision should be £6.3 million and that 200 extra staff should be recruited in conjunction with the introduction of a revised rostering arrangement. The 200 extra jobs have now been filled and it was necessary, in order to stay within allocations, to introduce the new roster. Negotiations had been taking place with the Prison Officers' Association for over three years on a new roster but it became clear after this time that there was no prospect of agreement. The lack of agreement could not be allowed to jeopardise the creation of jobs for 200 people.
When I last spoke to the House about this matter a number of Deputies suggested that I should meet directly with the Prison Officers' Association in an effort to resolve the dispute. I explained that while I had no objections to having discussions with the association my inclination was that it would be best for the time being if discussions under the mediator were to continue. In the event mediation proved unsuccessful and I then met with the association on a number of occasions in an effort to resolve the dispute.
During the course of these meetings I put forward a wide range of proposals in an effort to meet the concerns of the association. Last Friday I made the following offer as a means of settling the dispute:
"The Minister for Justice to appoint a person to carry out an independent review with the following terms of reference:
To review the rostering arrangements in the Prison Service with a view to devising a roster which would meet most efficiently and cost effectively the operational requirements of the Prison Service, taking into account the concerns of staff.
First meeting within two weeks with a view to reporting within six months.
Industrial action to be deferred pending consideration of the outcome of the review.
In the event of the POA making any claims based on the outcome of the proposed review, those claims would be processed under the Conciliation and Arbitration Scheme."
That offer was intended to meet the publicly expressed view of the association that the issue in the dispute was not money but the imposition of a roster and that the intervention of a third party in relation to actual rostering arrangements would settle the dispute. At the same time it was designed to ensure that any claims for additional remuneration as a consequence of a new roster would have to be dealt with under normal industrial relations procedures such as the conciliation and arbitration scheme as it could not be accepted that special arrangements beyond those available to other staff should be made available to the Prison Officers' Association.
In the end — and much to my disappointment — my offer proved unacceptable to the association which put forward counter-proposals all of which I could accept with one exception: the insistence by the Prison Officers' Association that the person carrying out the review should be allowed to make recommendations in relation to compensation and remuneration. It was clear that the key issue — on which agreement could not be reached — remained money in one guise or another. The Prison Officers' Association wanted special arrangements — not available to other staff — to be put in place to enable them to get extra money. This was clearly unacceptable.
I very much regret that the offer I made to the association failed to resolve the dispute especially given the public statements made by the association as to how the dispute could be settled. Pickets were placed on a number of prisons a short time after the talks broke down late last Friday night and the withdrawal of labour went ahead at 8 a.m. last Saturday. The House will generally be aware of developments in the prisons since then. I am sure all Members of the House will want to join with me in thanking the governors and their support staff in the prisons, the Garda and the Army for the tremendous efforts they are making to deal with the present situation. As to the dispute itself, I will, of course, continue to explore ways to achieve an acceptable resolution.
I think I should say in fairness to all concerned that the central issue is Government pay policy. The essential problem is that the association are seeking special arrangements outside the scope of normal industrial relations procedures in the Civil Service. The inevitable effect of any concession on this matter would be to completely undermine Government pay policy.
I too am disappointed that the offer made was not acceptable to the Prison Officers' Association. Is the offer of the appointment of a third party to review the roster arrangements still on the table?
Very much so. I went so far as to agree that they themselves could nominate the person to review the roster.
Can the Minister confirm newspaper reports that prison officers on strike at Cork prison were able to view the escape being made by prisoners at the weekend? Have the Department investigated this matter and can they confirm that this was the position? If there is an all-out strike, is the Minister satisfied that he will be in a position to ensure that prisoners will be fully secure?
I visited Cork prison for a number of hours yesterday and no suggestion was made to me which would in any way indicate that prison officers saw anyone escaping over a wall. That suggestion was not made to me and I was somewhat taken aback this morning to hear the radio reports to which the Deputy refers. I have asked that this should be inquired into and I cannot comment until I have further information. I spoke to 40 or 50 prison officers outside Cork prison and one officer said that rumours to the effect that they saw someone escaping over the wall were not true, yet the general secretary of the organisation says the opposite. I am not involved in the rumour business and I am checking it out. Until I know the facts I cannot say anything further.
In the event of an all-out strike taking place at the weekend, which neither I nor anybody else would wish to see and for which I cannot see any reason, the security of the prisons would very definitely be safe. I have already expressed my thanks to the governors and their support staff and to the Garda and the Army and everybody who has been involved in running the prisons since the strike began. I would also like to thank the prison officers for seeing that there was an orderly hand-over to the Garda and the Army. We appreciate their assistance in this very important matter. I have been in a number of prisons and spoken personally with the people involved. The secretariat in the Department of Justice are in constant communication with the entire prison network. Nobody wants a long drawn out strike, least of all I. I have enough to do in dealing with other problems. I am more than prepared to sit down with these people and anybody acting on their behalf to see if we can come to an agreement. I was certain we had agreement last Friday night but then an element was introduced which was totally contrary to Government policy on pay issues. This I could not accept.
I must advise the House that I have encroached considerably on the time allocated for Priority Questions. It is now five minutes past the time for dealing with such questions. I appreciate the importance of the matter being dealt with. I appreciate still further that Deputy Taylor has a question to be taken in priority time. I will give him the opportunity to ask a brief question but I must now go on to deal with Priority Questions. A brief question from Deputy Taylor.
I put down a Private Notice Question on this matter. I felt this was the best way of dealing with it but it was disallowed on the basis that we could discuss the matter with questions on the Order Paper.
Deputy Barrett knows that the Chair is obliged to deal with Priority Questions at 3.30 p.m. I have given great latitude in this matter. I will hear a brief supplementary from Deputy Taylor. This will be to the clear disadvantage of other Deputies who have put down priority questions.
I ask the indulgence of the Chair for a brief supplementary since we commenced in ordinary Question Time. My private notice question was disallowed for the same reason as Deputy Barrett has indicated.
I should like to facilitate all Deputies but we have now encroached to the extent of some six and a half minutes into priority time.
While accepting that we cannot go into the merits and demerits of this dispute at Question Time, it appears that the Minister is now at loggerheads with the POA. That is very unsatisfactory in view of the disturbances which have taken place in the prisons. We hope they will not be repeated. Is there any contact at present with the POA? If not, will the Minister not agree to accept a mediator to try to resolve this dispute? Will he give a commitment to the House not just to review the rostering but to review the whole dispute and try to negotiate an agreement between the two parties involved, namely the Minister and the POA? Will the Minister initiate this move as a matter of urgency?
I should like Members to know that the situation within the prisons as of now is quite stable, bearing in mind the situation we have come through. Normal prison life is going ahead.
We have had two deaths.
There have been some escapes and disturbances.
I would say to Deputy McCartan, who should not be interrupting, that tragically we have deaths in prison on occasion. The Deputy is being grossly mischievous if he tries to insinuate that these two deaths took place as a result of the situation we are now in. With regard to disturbances, I have spoken with people involved in running the prisons and I am clearly advised by the officials of my Department, who are doing an excellent job in this entire area, that the situation within the prisons as of now is as good as one could expect it to be. I should not like anyone to make play of that situation. Prisoners are receiving visits in the normal way.
Some difficulties were experienced with visits in Cork prison. I understand from the governor there as late as last night that when the people called to visit the member of their family, the family member in question did not for reasons of his own respond to the call to come and see the visitors. I want to say to Deputy Taylor that he will be disappointed that I am not in a stand-off position with anybody. I never have been and I do not intend to put myself into that situation, even to oblige Deputy Taylor. Neither would I nor could I accept Deputy Taylor's suggestion of a mediator and the role he sees for the mediator, bearing in mind that I have already told him, even if he did not need to be told, that to do as he suggests is totally contrary to Government policy on matters such as this. The Deputy should know that. He is here long enough to know it and he knows what is involved.
Government policies have been changed before when the need arose.
May I say to the Deputy——
It would not be the first U-turn.
I and the Government are willing to have an outside person, the nominee of the Prison Officers' Association, to devise a roster within the shortest possible period of time and any appropriate claims for compensation of any sort can be dealt with under the conciliation and arbitration scheme. It is the Government's intention to see to it that the conciliation and arbitration scheme will not be by-passed and if the Deputy thinks the Government are going to decide otherwise, then he is very wrong.
Priority Question No. 46.
Will you allow me one brief question?
Deputy Seán Barrett's question.
Can I ask one brief question?
I am sorry Deputy.
It is very unfair to those of us who put down Private Notice Questions on this very important issue that we cannot ask a supplementary question.
I want to ask one very brief question.
Sorry, Deputy. Question No. 46.
