Vol. 420 No. 7
16 Mr. O'Shea asked the Minister for Labour if he will outline the programme of policies and action he intends to put forward to comply with the provisions of the Protocol on Social Policy and the agreement on Social Policy in the Treaty of European Union; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
As I explained in a detailed reply to Dáil Question No. 50 by Deputy Peter Barry on 30 April, the precise implications of our adherence to the new Protocol on Social Policy agreed in the context of the Treaty on European Union will depend on the nature and content of any particular measures which may be brought forward at the initiative of the European Commission. In general, however, the Government acknowledges that there will be positive advantages for Irish workers from Ireland's adherence to the Protocol, which can be ensured only by approval of the new Treaty in the forthcoming referendum on 18 June.
I would point out, however, that the Treaty on European Union leaves the existing social policy provisions of the Rome Treaty and the Single European Act unchanged. Ireland will continue to take any necessary measures to comply with its obligations in relation to social policy measures adopted under those provisions. Ireland, of course, also remains fully committed to the Community Charter of Fundamental Social Rights — the Social Charter, as it is widely known — as a basis for achieving a strong social dimension to complement the economic objective of completion of the Single Market. The development of the Community's social policy in a progressive direction is wholly consistent with national social policy objectives as set out in the Programme for Economic and Social Progress.
Is the Minister not aware that Ireland and Britain are the two countries who have been criticised for not adhering to the Social Charter? At every opportunity we opted out. I do not blame the present Minister for that, but out history to date on the acceptance of the Social Charter has been outrageous. What was first presented as a Social Charter has now been watered down considerably. It is now seen as being of little importance to the people who wield power in Europe.
I do not agree with the Deputy's perception that we do not support the Social Charter. I can assure the Deputy and everyone concerned of the Government's commitment. The commitments in the Programme for Economic and Social Progress mirror and predate some of the social policy provisions now in the Social Charter as a result of the Maastricht Treaty provisions. As a matter of self interest we want to minimise any potential negative economic impact that such proposals would have on us. In terms of our commitment to the idea, we are in agreement with it and we see great advantages in the social cohesion aspects of the Treaty provisions because they will benefit economies on the periphery of Europe.
I do not agree with the Minister's comments with regard to measures which may be to the detriment of this country, because he can use that as a veto for any proposals that would improve the lot of workers. We are crying out for legisation on a minimum wage here. No effort has been made to introduce a national minimum wage here although we have it in many other European countries.
I understand the Deputy's suspicion that this could be a veto, but I would assure the Deputy that it will not be used as such. As a Government we have a duty to take into account the consequences of the implementation of certain social policy provisions. We use those as part of our negotiating stance to get the sort of concessions and flexibility from these directives which will make them workable. There is no point in us having very high aspirational directives from the European Commission, approved by the Council of Ministers, if they do not work. If we are to have any credibility in this area we must come forward with realistic proposals so that all 12 member states, with different traditional practices in this area, can put forward a common position with which everyone can live.
