I have had a Private Notice Question from Deputies Michael Noonan (Limerick East) and Deputy Jim Mitchell, in their joint names, and I have had a Private Notice Question on the same subject matter from Deputy Pat Rabbitte. Perhaps Deputy Noonan (Limerick East) and Deputy Mitchell would now put their question.
Private Notice Question. - Oireachtas Ushers' Dispute.
(Limerick East): In view of his responsibility for public service staff matters I want to ask the Minister for Finance if he has raised any objection to the disciplinary dispute involving four Oireachtas ushers being referred to an agreed independent third party for binding arbitration, if so if he would give his ground for such objection and if not, if he would now indicate his support for such a proposal?
Would Deputy Pat Rabitte now please put his question?
asked the Minister for Finance if he intends to take any measures to secure a solution to the current industrial dispute involving ushers employed in Leinster House, in view of the serious disruption that could be caused to the business of the Oireachtas by a prolonged dispute; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
First, the question of discipline in the House is a matter for the Ceann Comhairle under Statute and it is a matter for his discretion in this matter. I have responsibility, under Statute, for charge of the Civil Service; as long as anything that is agreed does not impinge on my statutory responsibility I would have no objection.
(Limerick East): Does the Minister not think it a disgrace that servants of the House should be forced to picket the House on a relatively minor matter because there is no machinery in place to arbitrate on disputes of this nature? Would he confirm that there is a provision in the conciliation and arbitration scheme for the staff of the Oireachtas for binding arbitration in pay matters but not in disciplinary matters? Would he not agree that there is an urgent need for a forum for the resolution of disputes on disciplinary matters?
I am aware that there is machinery in place in relation to pay matters. I am also aware, as the Deputy has suggested, that there is no provision in relation to disciplinary matters. I must repeat what I have said, the statutory responsibility is vested in the Ceann Comhairle in regard to disciplinary matters in this House. I have a different responsibility in relation to my charge of the Civil Service.
Deputy J. Mitchell rose.
Order, Deputy Pat Rabbitte.
May I ask the Minister if he agrees that the longer this dispute is allowed run the more intractable a solution will become and whether, notwithstanding the fact that there is no machinery in place to handle this kind of dispute, precisely because it is obstructed by his Department, that there is no obstacle either in the scheme or legally that prevents the parties voluntarily agreeing to the arbitration process being set in motion? An independent arbitrator could be mutually agreed by both parties. Does the Minister accept that it is a major step for the union to have committed themselves in advance to using an independent arbitrator subject to the condition that the outcome would be binding? Can the Minister who has ultimate responsibility not agree to facilitate both parties in this dispute with such an independent arbitrator on the terms I have outlined?
I disagree with Deputy Rabbitte in that I do not have ultimate responsibility. The responsibility is very clear in Statute, in relation to the duties of the Ceann Comhairle, in regard to discipline in this House. I have a different set of statutory responsibilities.
Your Department conveyed the contrary this morning to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
I am well aware what my Department conveyed. The Deputy would like to twist it. As long as nothing impinges on my statutory responsibility in charge of the Civil Service, everything else is a matter for the discretion of the Ceann Comhairle.
I would ask the Minister for Finance to clarify his original reply. Did he say he had no objection to this matter being referred to arbitration? Would he clarify the attitude of the Fianna Fáil members of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges this morning when the Fine Gael motion was put regarding third party binding arbitration? If the committee were to meet again this afternoon, could the Minister assure us that the Fianna Fáil members would support a motion on those lines?
I am not in a position to say what happened at the meeting this morning. There are different interpretations. Our Whip says the Opposition are misinformed. It would be clearly inappropriate for me to interfere in any way with the Ceann Comhairle in the exercise of these functions or to make any public comment on the matters at issue. I have made it abundantly clear to the House where my statutory responsibilities lie and where the Ceann Comhairle's statutory responsibilities lie. I have no objection to anything that does not interfere with my statutory responsibility in relation to the charge of the Civil Service.
Can I take that as an assurance from the Minister that if we request a further meeting of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges this afternoon the Fianna Fáil members will not oppose a referral to a third party?
We did not oppose anything.
Could we have an assurance——
Ask me a question and I will give you an assurance.
Will Fianna Fáil agree to a referral to a third party or at least will they not object to such a proposal at the Committee on Procedure and Privileges? Yes or no?
Will Fine Gael behave responsibly?
I do not need to stand to do the Government's business but I definitely heard the Government Whip indicate at the meeting this morning that he had no objection to such a procedure.
(Interruptions.)
We are all working to resolve this matter so that workers in this House do not have to picket the gates and we can get them back to their duties without delay. I would ask the Minister to undertake to resolve immediately the one problem that appeared to be causing a difficulty, namely a memorandum from his Department which indicated clearly to the Ceann Comhairle and to those of us present that he had no authority to abrogate his functions——
The business of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges is expected to be treated as private and confidential.
As the area had been well trespassed before I stood, I would ask the Minister to have the issue clarified. The memorandum read at the meeting seemed to indicate that the Ceann Comhairle could not abrogate his functions in this area to an arbitrator. That seems to be all that is holding up matters.
Would the Minister agree to act in regard to that communication?
I call Deputy Rabbitte for a final question.
Does the Minister wish to answer?
The Minister wishes to say no more than he has already said. The discretion of the Ceann Comhairle under statute is a matter for the Ceann Comhairle. I have statutory responsibility in relation to the Civil Service and it would be totally inappropriate for me to tell the Ceann Comhairle. I do not have the authority to do so.
What is wrong with the Minister for Finance and the Ceann Comhairle getting together? This is getting childish.
Deputy Harte might as well get on the bandwagon too.
The Taoiseach is an expert on the bandwagon. I do not have his bad habits. He has a right to be talking about bandwagons. I hear what he says but it does not seem very intelligent.
Do I understand the Minister to say that he is agreeable to using the voluntary mechanism which exists to cause an independent arbitrator to be found, the outcome of his findings to be binding on both parties? Will the Minister permit that or will we have a continuation of the situation where his Department are obstructing the Chair in his approach to agreeing that this kind of mechanism be put in motion?
I would ask the House not to say or do anything now which would aggravate a delicate situation. I am seeking to resolve this matter in a very amicable manner and I would ask you to bear with me.
On Friday last when there were very few public representatives in the House I spoke of the need to bring this problem to a resolution and I have asked on behalf of the Labour Party that every possible mechanism be used to resolve it. It is apparent this afternoon that we are playing with words. We must solve this problem, so that people do not have to picket outside the gate. Every effort must be made. It would seem that the Government side are not prepared to take the relevant action.
(Limerick East): It is clear from the Minister's reply that both the Ceann Comhairle and the Minister for Finance have a statutory function in this matter. I would ask the Minister for Finance to meet the Ceann Comhairle this afternoon with a view to appointing an independent third party to resolve this problem amicably.
For the benefit of the House I want to put on record what is at stake. Under section 18 of the Staff of the Houses of the Oireachtas Act, 1959, the appropriate authority in relation to the joint staff of the Houses of the Oireachtas is the Chairman of Dáil Éireann. Under section 15 of the Civil Service Regulation Act, 1956, and sections 21 and 22 of the Staff of the Houses of the Oireachtas Act, 1959, disciplinary measures against the joint staff are a matter for the Chairman of Dáil Éireann. That is very clear-cut. I am responsible under section 17 of the Civil Service Regulation Act, 1956, for the regulation and control of the Civil Service.
Why does the Minister not answer Deputy Noonan's question?
The Deputy is not prepared to listen.