Vol. 490 No. 2
10 Mr. Noonan asked the Minister for Finance the guidelines laid down by his Department within which negotiations on the Garda pay claim will take place; and the initiative, if any, he intends taking in order that a fair settlement can be reached with gardaí; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9670/98]
It would be useful if I indicated the general background against which the Government has to consider the current Garda pay claims. Since 1987 successive Governments have followed a policy of pay moderation both in the private sector and in the public service where pay accounts for half of current public expenditure. This policy, which has been embodied by consensus in the wider context of national programmes, has contributed in no small way to low inflation and improved international competitiveness and has restored order to the public finances. As a result, Governments have been able to direct Exchequer resources towards improvements in services and reductions in taxation which have benefited the community as a whole. The imperative to maintain this policy has become more pressing with our approaching accession to EMU. Control must be maintained over public expenditure if we are to meet the requirements of the Stability and Growth Pact, which comes into operation on 1 January next year, and participate successfully in EMU.
I do not think the Deputy will argue with me about the success of the policies followed over the past ten years or so. The current buoyant state of the economy is evidence in itself. However, we cannot afford to become complacent about our recent economic growth. The Celtic tiger can all too easily become a paper tiger if we depart from the sound economic policies and the national consensus approach which brought it into being in the first place. Pay moderation has been such a key ingredient in our success that it is difficult even to comprehend a 39 per cent pay claim in the current economic environment.
The guidelines adopted by the Government side in the negotiations with the Garda associations were dictated by the approach to PCW local bargaining for the generality of public service groups. That is a reasonable and fair approach. To go beyond it would risk a reopening of PCW deals already completed and that could have enormous consequences not only for public expenditure but also for the pay climate generally in the economy. That is a road we cannot travel and it is unrealistic of any group to expect us to do so. I am sure the Deputy will fully appreciate the implications of the situation from his own experience as Minister for Health.
The offer of a 5.5 per cent increase to the associations was by reference to the general PCW local bargaining norm for the public service.
However, the offer also provided for ongoing discussions to explore what further possibilities could be identified from productivity and savings. On the invitation of the independent chairperson, the Association of Garda Sergeants and Inspectors has chosen to pursue this avenue but the Garda Representative Association has opted for industrial action instead. The Government is extremely disappointed at the position adopted by the Garda Representative Association. Management has indicated that it is available to continue discussions on the basis put forward by the chairperson. I strongly urge the association to desist from its current action, which cannot be for the good of the force in the long run, and to resume discussions. I am sure a solution which is fair to the members of the Garda Síochána and which acknowledges the interest of the community at large is possible.
I thank the Minister for his reply. Does he agree that the Government is reaping the whirlwind which it sowed prior to the last election, when the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, then in Opposition, actively encouraged gardaí to submit extravagant claims and to take rigorous action against the Government of the day, and that the current Government's difficulty is that it is now seen by the GRA to be in breach of commitments it made prior to the election?
That is not the situation which pertained prior to the last election. The then Fianna Fáil spokesperson on justice, now the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, met with the associations. I was Opposition spokesperson on finance and I remember well the carefully worded letter issued prior to the election to the Garda Representative Association and the other associations representing gardaí. It is incorrect to say gardaí were given any indication we would go a certain route.
During the course of that election campaign, various representations were made on a personal level and approaches were made to Fianna Fáil front bench members — myself and others — to deviate from that approach. As the Deputy knows well, during the heat of an election campaign there is often the temptation for politicians, especially those in Opposition, to follow a route for political expediency, but we resisted that. I am certain of that because as Opposition spokesperson on finance I was cognisant of what we would be likely to set off. However, the previous Government made decisions which have a bearing on the current situation, and Deputy Noonan, the former Minister for Health, and Deputy Quinn, the former Minister for Finance and now Leader of the Labour Party, would know of some of those.
Gardaí with a case to make should return to the negotiating table. A reasonable proposition was put forward by the independent chairperson, Mr. Brennan, last Saturday week. The Association of Garda Sergeants and Inspectors has returned to the table on that basis and I ask the Garda Representative Association to do likewise.
I thank the Minister for his reply and for referring to the letter which I presume he was involved in drafting as Opposition spokesman on finance. Is he aware that the then Opposition spokesman on justice, now Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, as well as handing over the letter, gave verbal commitments effectively suggesting that the door was wide open and that gardaí would get whatever they wanted? Is he also aware that Fianna Fáil's director of elections in the last election campaign was effectively simultaneously running the Garda campaign?
I am well aware of the pressure I came under at the time and of my response to all entreaties. I am satisfied that my colleague, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, on behalf of the Fianna Fáil Party, gave no such nods and winks to any of the Garda associations. That is on the record and I am very clear about it. It would have been far easier to go in the other direction but we did not go that way prior to the last general election. I am certain of that.
Can I move the Minister on to October 1997? Is he aware the GRA claims it has a letter signed by the Secretary General of the Department of Justice stating that phase one of its negotiation process under the PCW will be completed without regard to any productivity agreement or changes in practice carried out by the GRA? Is he further aware that it claims to have this letter in its headquarters in Phibsboro and rely on it for its negotiating stance? It claims the Government is in breach of an agreement by not complying with the terms of the letter which I have no doubt was sent by Mr. Dalton with the full knowledge and compliance of the Minister and the Department of Finance.
The Garda Representative Association could be in no doubt as to the Government's line in this regard. People may ask why the Government has been so adamant on the matter. As I outlined in my reply, it would be beyond comprehension to do anything else because, as pointed out by representatives of other public service unions at conferences last weekend, if the 39 per cent claim submitted by the GRA or anything above the PCW norm were conceded, it would set off a raft of claims. Deputy Noonan will be aware from his time as Minister for Health that the agreement with the nursing associations was considered by other sectors in the public service despite the best efforts of the then Government to ring fence it. As a trade union leader stated last week, if major concessions were made on Garda pay, all bets would then be off in regard to pay in the public service. These realities must be known to the GRA. It would be incorrect of me to give any other impression either inside or outside the House to the representatives of the GRA. It is not possible for the Government to concede to anything like its demands. It will be possible for the official side to resume negotiations only on the basis set out by Mr. Declan Brennan last Saturday week. That is the only way the negotiations can continue. That offer has been accepted by the Association of Garda Sergeants and Inspectors and I ask the Garda Representative Association to resume the talks on that basis.
The Deputy may not reach his next question if he uses up any more time on this one.
This is an important issue. The nurses deserved every penny they got. It was skilful negotiation on my part which prevented the hospitals being thrown into chaos. There is an equal obligation on the Minister to prevent the predicted chaos we will face next Friday when the majority of ordinary members of the Garda Síochána intend to ring in sick and leave citizens unprotected. What does the Minister intend to do to ensure this chaos does not commence on Friday and continue on several subsequent days?
I do not intend to engage in a policy of appeasement which will set off a raft of public sector pay claims that will take us back to the mid-1980s when we were effectively financially bankrupt. Neither I nor the Government is prepared to do that. I agree with Deputy Noonan that this is a serious matter in the ambit of overall Government economic policy. I outlined in my reply the serious position that could arise if a pay claim of the order of magnitude sought by the Garda were conceded. We are 16 months past the completion date for the PCW, but the gardaí are pursuing this claim under that agreement. The GRA was one of the first groups to accept a settlement under the PCW. However, because the average norm settled under the PCW turned out to be 5.5 per cent it has re-entered the negotiations, even though its claim was settled earlier. It is not possible for the Government to concede its claim.
I am sure Deputy Noonan appreciates the difficulty in this respect as it relates to the overall public finances. In the interest of having a coherent economic policy and public sector pay policy, the Government cannot concede to anything like what the Garda Representative Association is seeking. This matter can be resolved only on the basis of the formula put forward by Mr. Brennan last Saturday week. That is the only basis on which these negotiations can resume.
May I ask the Minister——
No, we have already spent 14 minutes on this question. Twenty minutes are allocated for five priority questions.
On a point of order, you, Sir, have just arrived in the House.
I appreciate that. I heard the Ceann Comhairle before I came into the House.
There is something about which you may not be aware. The Taoiseach's questions over-ran by a quarter of an hour.
I ask Deputy Noonan to resume his seat until I inform him exactly what happened.
It is normal to give a final supplementary to the Deputy in possession.
The Taoiseach's questions concluded at 3.33 p.m. It is now 3.47 p.m. We have spent 14 minutes on one question.
It is a very important one.
Of course, but every Member who tables a question believes it is important.
This is the only question that deals with the chaos that will occur if the gardaí close down the criminal justice system next Friday.
We have spent 14 of the 20 minutes allocated for priority question on this question. In fairness to the other Deputies who have tabled priority questions and to other Deputies in the House, we cannot allow 14 minutes for one question. I call Question No. 11.
I protest strongly about this. Normally Opposition spokespersons are not closed down without notice. They are always given an opportunity to ask a final supplementary.
That may well be the case, but one question does not last for 14 minutes. There is no precedent for a question lasting that length of time.
I think you do not want to hear the question. You are protecting the Government on a sensitive issue.
Deputy Noonan, I ask you to withdraw the remark that I am protecting the Government.
You entered the House without knowing the background and you are breaking precedent by——
Is the Deputy withdrawing the allegation that the Chair is partisan?
If you find it offensive——
I do.
——I withdraw it.
Thank you.
I maintain the allegation that you are being unfair to me in that you are not allowing me to put a final supplementary. In normal practice, Members are not closed down without notice.
