Mary O'Rourke
Question:7 Mrs. O'Rourke asked the Minister for Enterprise and Employment if the dispute at Irish Life has any implications for the State's insurance obligations. [10756/97]
Priority Questions. - Irish Life Dispute.
I assume Deputy O'Rourke is referring to my responsibilities as financial supervisor of Irish Life. These responsibilities do not give me a role in the day to day running of Irish Life. Irish Life is subject to financial supervision in accordance with the insurance Acts, 1909 to 1990, in common with other direct insurers. In accordance with the requirements of those Acts and the Regulations made under them, Irish Life demonstrates on an annual basis that it is solvent. It has substantial assets in excess of the strict requirements of the Acts. For that reason, I am confident the present dispute will not affect the financial security of the company under the insurance Acts.
The Minister knows quite well that is not the question I asked. The question I asked was much more amplified. In a letter from your office, a Cheann Comhairle, a section of the question was disallowed because it had a bearing on the industrial dispute at the firm. That is the reason the question which was directed to the Minister for Enterprise and Employment appears in its present form. In the course of that question I asked if he would seek to intervene, bearing in mind on the last occasion he told me he would not intervene "right now". Given that ten weeks have elapsed will he seek to intervene in a case where 360 mature people are out of work? Since they are continuing to stay out of work and are not satisfied with points put to them there must be some fault on the other side. That was the matter on which I sought to table the question and I would be pleased to elicit an answer from either of the two assiduously reading Ministers opposite.
You will understand, a Cheann Comhairle, I can only answer the question tabled.
Perhaps the Minister could stray into the topic I put forward.
Unlike the Deputy, I like to stay strictly within the parameters that are proper.
Since when?
The question relates to my responsibilities as financial supervisor and to ensure that prudential solvency requirements are met by the company. I am satisfied it does not have any implications for those.
When this company was involved in the Mespil flats controversy, political involvement helped to sort out the difficulties. Is the Minister satisfied all the normal industrial relations channels have been explored in this case?
I am. The subject matter of the dispute has been before the Labour Court and the Labour Relations Commission. It might be regarded as a surprise that the proposals that emerged from the Labour Relations Commission, on its own initiative, were not successful. That they were not successful is indicative of the depth of feeling on the part of the people in dispute. Having utilised the machinery established by the State, it is regrettable the dispute is proving intractable. I ask both parties to the dispute to make a final effort, either to avail of the resources of the State machinery, in terms of a dispute resolution, or the employer labour conference. In either case it is time to bring the dispute to an end. Both parties have a responsibility to do that and certainly the State machinery is available to assist them in any positive direction.
I am pleased the Minister strayed into the improper arena. I would be glad if the Minister of State would convey to his fellow party member, the Minister for Social Welfare, Deputy De Rossa, that the workers who have been out for ten weeks are not receiving social welfare. It will be recalled that special regulations were made for Irish Press and Dunnes Stores workers. In both those cases there was a dispute as to whether staff were locked out, sent out or whatever but in any event special social welfare regulations were made whereby they could enter into the social welfare code. That has not been done for Irish Life staff. I tabled a Special Notice Question and sought to raise a question on the Adjournment, both of which were not allowed. I ask the Minister of State if his colleague would see fit to bring in special social welfare regulations to deal with this case.
That is a separate matter.
We are really straying now. What Deputy O'Rourke is choosing not to see is that this is a conventional trade dispute, as I understand it. Special circumstances obtained in the Irish Press and Dunnes Stores cases which do not obtain in this case. The union is not arguing that the dispute is anything other than a conventional trade dispute. The workers concerned are in receipt of dispute benefit——
£30 per week.
——and would have an entitlement in respect of their dependants, if not in respect of the people who are on strike. I will be pleased to discuss this with the Minister for Social Welfare to see if anything constructive can be done.