Bertie Ahern
Question:6 Mr. B. Ahern asked the Taoiseach if the ratification of Partnership 2000 is complete; the date on which it comes into force; and the date on which it is due to expire. [4892/97]
Ceisteanna—Questions. - Partnership 2000.
All 19 social partner organisations have ratified Partnership 2000 which came into effect from 1 January 1997. The pay elements of the agreement will expire at end-March and end-September 2000 for the private and public sectors, respectively.
How will special agreements be handled under Partnership 2000? It would seem that already special agreements have been reached. Based on what the Minister responsible has said these agreements are more than he would have considered for his Department's estimate for special agreements. Under Partnership 2000 how will special agreements be structured and dealt with by the Government?
Payments in respect of productivity and other matters affecting the special nature of work being done or changes in the pattern of work being done by individual categories of employee are to be dealt with under the arrangements set out in Partnership 2000. There are financial arrangements for that and also arrangements which involve independent study and adjudication and conciliation in establishing the appropriate way of meeting claims of this nature.
Will the Taoiseach advise if there are limits, as in the past, to ensure there are ring fences on special agreements? If so, will the Taoiseach indicate the 1997 estimates for such agreements?
Questions about the financial implications of any matter are better put to the Minister for Finance. As in the case of all previous agreements, arrangements are provided for looking at special issues which arise. However, in this agreement the focus is very much on achieving additional improvements in productivity in an identifiable way as the basis for payments made in response to and as a result of the resources released by those improvements in productivity.
There was a precedent in the past whereby the Taoiseach would give information on special agreements. Arrangements regarding productivity have been included in all national agreements since 1970. Some of these were more effective than others. Will the Taoiseach get the information I requested as the arrangements were negotiated in his Department?
The Deputy should look at paragraph 4 of the annex to the agreement which deals with local level negotiations and the revision of the conciliation and arbitration scheme. I can send the Deputy a copy of page 80 of the agreement.
I have probably read the document in more detail than the Taoiseach. Will he outline to the House now or send me the information later on the special arrangements agreed by the Government for 1997? That is the only information I am seeking.
The agreements we have entered into are on the public record. If the Deputy is referring to, for example, the Government's acceptance of the Labour Court recommendations on nurses' pay, the provision is a matter of public record. I take it the Deputy is happy the Government accepted the Labour Court recommendation on nurses' pay and I hope he supports the Government in that matter. I take it he will equally support us in making the necessary financial arrangements to ensure that claim is met and he would not have wished us to take any other course on nurses' pay. That matter is being dealt with. If the Deputy is inviting me to engage in some form of speculation about hypothetical situations, that is not a course I intend to follow.
The Taoiseach either does not want to answer my question or is trying to misinterpret it. The Government negotiated an agreement which dealt with financial matters relevant to taxpayers. I presume it was agreed to set a figure for special agreements, as happened in the case of previous programmes. I am asking the Taoiseach the figure agreed by the Government for special increases in 1997. I presume the Government did not conclude the agreement without knowing the monetary figure for special arrangements in 1997. I do not know why the Taoiseach is dealing with matters I did not raise. I will deal with those matters whenever he wants but all I am concerned about now is one figure.
The Deputy has forgotten that the position has changed and we are now operating under the disciplines of the Maastricht criteria.
Since when?
When the Deputy was in office special pay increases were added to existing expenditure commitments.
I did not ask about special increases, I asked about the figure for 1997.
As we have announced, additional funds to cover an increase in expenditure in a particular area will have to be found elsewhere within the overall expenditure envelopes. There is no extra amount for special pay increases, which will be dealt with within the overall parameters of public expenditure.
The Taoiseach is flying by the seat of his pants.
The House and the public will agree the Government's acceptance of the Labour Court recommendation on nurses' pay was not only wise but just.
That was not the question.
In order that I do not misquote the Taoiseach or upset him, am I to take it conciliation and arbitration and Labour Court awards have not been provided for in 1997 and any special awards will be paid for by way of cutbacks in Departments? Is that the way the Government is ordering the public finances?
The Deputy must not have read the Government statements on this matter.
I am here to ask questions and the Taoiseach is here to answer them.
In the case of the additional expenditure which falls to be met as a result of the Labour Court award to nurses over and above what was already provided for in the Estimates, we have made it clear we will take steps to find that money elsewhere within overall public expenditure limits. This is different from the position which pertained when the Deputy was in office when special increases were simply added on.
They were not.
That is the end of questions to the Taoiseach today.
I take it no figure has been provided for special arbitration awards?
The Government will overrun its budget.
Deputy Ahern shows a level of naivety in this matter which is quite appalling.
The Government will dole out money to every pressure group which knocks on its door.
He believes the appropriate thing to do is to include a large figure and invite everyone to bid for it.
The Taoiseach is misleading the public.
(Interruptions.)
It seems from the way he has reacted to this matter Deputy Ahern does not have a very good understanding of industrial relations.
The Government will simply dole out the money.
It will be like a three card trick.
It will give in to every pressure group.
The Taoiseach is misleading the House.
The Deputy wants the Government to say it will provide an extra £X and everyone who wants money should come along and play for it. We are not providing any extra money, we are saying additional money has to be met from within the overall envelope of public expenditure.
The Taoiseach should admit the Government does not have a policy on this matter. The Government is a joke.
(Interruptions.)
If the Chair was obeyed this disorder would not take place.
It would have been easier for the Taoiseach to answer the question.
He should answer the question.
The Deputy demonstrates a lamentable lack of understanding of the disciplines of the Maastricht criteria in the particularly ill-judged question he posed to me on this occasion.
Why does the Taoiseach not admit there is no money for this purpose in the Estimates?
Deputy Burke clearly does not want to hear my reply.
The Taoiseach can run but he cannot hide.
If the Chair was obeyed when he called Priority Questions this kind of disorder would not take place.
It is most unseemly.
I am proceeding to questions nominated for priority.