Vol. 395 No. 9
13 Mr. J. Mitchell asked the Minister for Labour if he will outline the Government's objective for the next pay agreement to follow the present Programme for National Recovery if he envisages the next agreement lasting for three years; the estimated time scale for the opening and concluding of talks; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
It would be entirely premature at this stage to attempt to set out detailed objectives for any programme to follow the present Programme for National Recovery which still has ten months to run. The same applies to any attempted forecast of the possible structure and provisions of any such programme.
In view of the Minister's statement on radio in the past two weeks after Congress had decided to continue with the present Programme for National Recovery in which the Minister sought to highlight the difficulties of another agreement would the Minister like to elaborate on those fears?
I stated on that occasion and on a number of other occasions since that it will be difficult to negotiate another programme. In autumn 1987 there were many difficulties — financial and employment difficulties — and there was a willingness on the part of social partners to try to come to an agreement to get the country out of the economic difficulties. Now the position is different. There is good growth in the economy; employment, though slowly, is increasing and unemployment is decreasing. Investment is quite high and there are many opportunities from which many people wish to reap the benefits. The aspirations of our people are far higher than they were in the autumn of 1987. In relation to the question posed by the Deputy I believe that any new programme for national recovery should cover far more than the 1987-90 agreement covered.
It should cover macro-economic policy far more than the other agreement. Greater social equity and social progress were not dealt with to any great extent in the last programme, though what was provided for in that programme was delivered. Employment and tax reform were dealt with but employment would have to be dealt with to a greater extent now. Perhaps in different ways and to different degrees than its predecessor, it should also extend to some other areas of social and economic policy. Probably, the discussions will not start for some months yet.
Do I take it from what the Minister has said that he is committed to the principle of pursuing a framework from the National Economic and Social Council and the social partners as a basis for a future agreement? Would he agree that that is a worthy format as a future basis for pay discussions?
Yes, I would agree with the Deputy. The National Economic and Social Council have already been requested to start working on the basis of further studies. The original Programme for National Recovery was based on the 1986 NESC report and on the jobs crisis Congress of Trade Unions' document. Further NESC studies on how they see the 1991-94 period would be extremely helpful and will form the basis for a further programme for national recovery.
Is it the period 1991-94 that NESC are examining? In that context are they looking at the projections for income tax, social insurance and how pay inter-relates with social welfare?
They have already started work on the papers and they are bringing forward papers covering more or less the areas I have mentioned. These areas will form the basis for a further programme for national recovery. Taxation, social welfare policy, unemployment policy and social aspects are the key areas of study for the programme.
