Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 30 Apr 1998

Vol. 490 No. 4

Adjournment of Dáil under Standing Order 31: Garda Dispute.

Ms McManus

I thank you, a Cheann Comhairle, for allowing this debate to take place. It is a measure of the seriousness of the situation that my request for leave to move the Adjournment of the Dáil under Standing Order 31 was accepted. While not quite unprecedented, the decision to allow this debate is only made in the most extraordinary circumstances.

I hoped your good sense and concern, a Cheann Comhairle, would have been matched by the Government. However, instead of having a grasp on reality, the Government appears to be losing its grip altogether. What promised to be a serious situation has now turned into a crisis.

I will detail the origin of this crisis. It lies firmly at the feet of the Minister of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. In Opposition, the Minister was guilty of outrageous conduct. He deliberately exaggerated the extent of crime in order to paint himself as the champion who would bring in zero tolerance. He led the Opposition Front Bench out to meet the Garda when they protested outside the gates of this House over a year ago. He encouraged the GRA to believe that, when in Government, he would deliver on its demands. He may deny this now and no doubt will do so again. However, it was common knowledge among the gardaí that, in the Minister's case, they were pushing an open door. That message came back to us during the last election campaign when we talked to gardaí on the doorsteps. More importantly, this was accepted by the GRA. As late as today, PJ Stone is on public record as stating that he was led to believe by the Minister that this was the case. Whatever opinions one has about PJ Stone, and there are many different opinions of him, nobody could call him a stupid man or underestimate his ability. He is a man who sees a flag when it is waved under his nose and he is not afraid to talk about it afterwards.

Since this situation emerged, Government Ministers have come into the House and performed like ostriches hiding their heads in the sands to escape danger. First, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform answered questions at length on Tuesday without imparting any information of substance. On the same day, Deputy McCreevy showed an obduracy which is only fanning the flames and creating more obstacles to finding a resolution to the dispute. On yesterday's Order of Business the Taoiseach repeated the same mantra of his Ministers — there would be no breach of public sector pay and would the gardaí please turn up for work tomorrow.

This is pie in the sky stuff. Tomorrow, unless this Government stops acting like the chorus of a Greek tragedy and starts performing like a Government capable of running the country, our society will be put in danger the extent of which is unimaginable. Thousands of gardaí have made it clear they will not turn up for work. They have indicated that they will call in sick as a ruse to subvert the bar which exists against their right to strike.

This is not a palatable tactic and raises ethical questions for such key service providers. However, be that as it may, the reality is that no one can force the gardaí to turn up for work if they choose not to and yet no one can do without them going into work. If we cannot depend on the gardaí to carry out all the routine work relating to road safety, crime prevention and detection, court work and the other functions they provide, how does the Government intend to replace the irreplaceable?

We are facing into the prospect that the most basic protection and security will be denied to citizens across this State. This is a terrifying prospect, particularly for the elderly and the vulnerable who are alarmed and frightened by the possibilities that such a scenario conjures up. I have asked the Taoiseach to stop being a spectator of this dispute and start being a leader who is not afraid of taking responsibility and I am asking him again. No one would take any credit away from him in relation to his negotiating skills that led to the Northern Ireland Agreement. He has proved himself to be effective in the reconciliation of conflicting forces. However, it will totally undermine the credibility of the Taoiseach if he persists in refusing to take a hands-on approach to this dispute. There is the imminent possibility of a breakdown of law and order. That is how serious the position is. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has not only proved himself incapable of resolving the crisis but has been the cause of the crisis. That is how serious the position is.

This is not the first time that the brief has proved to be beyond the capability of the Minister. It is the latest in a series of debacles over which he has presided. This, unlike the others, casts a doubt over the competence of the Minister to fulfil his ministerial role. When asked in the Dáil on Tuesday to outline the meetings he had in the face of this crisis the Minister fudged his answers. It was clear he had not had meetings with the Garda Commissioner or with the Garda Representative Association. Yesterday it is reported he met both.

Will he tell us in a clear coherent comprehensive reply what happened at those meetings? What preparations were put in place to protect the public good? The Minister has a duty not just to inform the House but to reassure the public he has a coherent and worked-out plan of action that will ensure security for the citizens of the State, to which they are entitled and for which they have paid.

Let us be under no illusions. There are many criminals who want to take advantage of this situation. We cannot afford any further hand-wringing, pleadings or wishful thinking to avert this dispute. It is reported in the newspapers that there is strong support for this industrial action and that in some stations it is 100 per cent. This issue will not go away because the Taoiseach yesterday pleaded to gardaí to turn up for work tomorrow. There will have to be some clear indication today that the Government will take a new initiative to resolve this dispute. We all appreciate there are implications for public sector pay and nobody underestimates the difficulties of teasing out a solution. One thing is certain, a solution will have to be found as the alternative is unthinkable. We need to hear how the Government intends to reach that solution without destroying the very fabric of the relationship between the Garda and the public and without putting our citizens in serious danger.

If there is a clear direction and commitment from the Government it would be fair to ask the Garda in those circumstances to defer their action for a week and allow the new initiative to be given a chance. Everybody understands the position of the gardaí. The Garda do an extremely difficult and often dangerous job throughout the country. They are the last resort when all civilisation fails, and have to pick up the pieces and ensure the security we all enjoy is maintained. They deserve to be well paid, nobody would dispute that. They deserve to be recognised for the difficult and challenging work they do.

This dispute should not have got to this point and should not have been allowed to be encouraged by a Minister, when in Opposition. He was opportunist in his approach to an issue which he knew had implications for public sector pay. Yet he still went ahead and created an expectation which he now has to deal with. He is reaping the whirlwind, the chickens are coming home to roost. He will have to sort out the problem, the genesis for which he bears responsibility.

The ordinary citizen, the elderly person locking up tonight, the sick and the vulnerable should not be expected to pay for the Minister's track record and the failure of the Government and the Minister for Finance who has a central role, with the Taoiseach, to face up to responsibilities.

Thank you, a Cheann Comhairle, for allowing this debate, that it is unusual and exceptional reflects the seriousness of the situation. I ask the Garda Representative Association to appreciate it has brought this dispute to the heart of Government. That is an acknowledgement of how seriously its demands are being treated. If that seriousness can be reflected in the Government response, generosity on its part should be forthcoming. I hope it will be forthcoming but ultimately the Government, which is responsible for ensuring security in the State, will be required to provide a vehicle for resolving this dispute sooner or later. Let us see the beginning of the end now.

Mr. Higgins

(Mayo): Thank you for allowing us raise this issue by way of Standing Order 31. There are 15 Government Departments, many of which carry large numbers of public sector workers, in some cases with complex grading systems. In 14 Departments there is pay peace. In the other Department — the key security Department — the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform there is a major upheaval at operational ranks of the Garda Síochána. The reason there is anger, frustration and bitterness on an unprecedented scale is because of the manner in which the Minister has handled this issue. Each Member will have received a letter from the Garda Representative Association which states:

We are bitterly disappointed that the Garda Síochána have been treated so shabbily in the present pay talks. Promises in relation to our pay increase have not been met and I request your assistance in this regard.

The issue has been treated shabbily. The promises, to which the GRA refer, were given by the Minister when in Opposition. These were the only promises made, as far as I am aware. When the Garda marched on Leinster House during the term of office of the previous Government, he met them, listened to their case and sympathised with them. He left them with a certain understanding, created an atmosphere of empathy and the result was a definite expectation that Fianna Fáil and particularly the Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, would deliver on the Garda pay issue when elected to Government.

It is the betrayal of that clear understanding that has led to the present impasse and the chaos which seems set to ensue tomorrow. It is only one of a series of exaggerated promises which the Minister gave when in Opposition and which have been disowned or discarded and certainly not delivered on in Government.

In relation to his understandings with the Garda when in Opposition did the Minister promise to favourably consider a pay increase of 15 per cent when in office? What exactly did he say to them? What commitments did he give them on this and other issues? It is obvious there were specific areas of agreement in relation to the pay issue. The House is entitled to know what these are because this issue and his failure to deliver have thrown petrol on the flames since he assumed office in June 1997.

I am extremely worried about the consequences of tomorrow's action. My understanding is that up to 80 per cent of the rank and file members of the force will not report for duty. When 6,500 ordinary gardaí out of 8,500 stay away it places an impossible burden on the 2,000 who report for duty. It is physically impossible for 2,000 rank and file members to provide even a minimalist but adequate police service albeit backed up by sergeants, inspectors, superintendents, etc. Has the Minister a guarantee that all sergeants will report for duty tomorrow?

I would like some specific details on the Minister's meeting with the Garda Representative Association yesterday afternoon. Did any further offer come from his side in relation to the pay issue? In his discussions with Garda representatives and the Commissioner did he receive an indication of what level of absenteeism could be expected or how many gardaí were likely to turn up tomorrow? How co-ordinated is the withdrawal of service? Is there a guarantee of a physical presence or skeleton staff in all Garda stations? Is there a danger that some communities will be left with no Garda presence — in other words, no protection — tomorrow? Will escorts for cash movements be affected? Will Operation Lifesaver be suspended for the day? Is it anticipated that the Garda drugs task force will be depleted? There is huge public concern. As well as tangible protection people need psychological reassurance, which is why whatever contingency plans exist should be spelt out in detail to the public. The Commissioner should go on television and radio to indicate the emergency plans which have been put in place.

From the manpower viewpoint, it is crucial that there be enough personnel on the ground. The bulk of gardaí will not turn up but to augment those who do, has the Army been requested to make itself available? Has the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform met the Minister for Defence? Has the Garda Commissioner met the Army Chief of Staff? What functions, if any, have been agreed with the Army? As Deputy McManus said, the danger is that this may not be the end but the beginning. This is a national emergency and we do not know where it will end but the power to end it rests in the Minister's hands.

Dr. Upton

The unresolved dispute between members of the Garda Representative Association and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform is a matter of enormous public concern. That this dispute has led to the proposed action by gardaí tomorrow is disturbing to the public. The full extent of this concern can be gauged from the fact that you, a Cheann Comhairle, have taken the most unusual step of acceding to requests by Opposition spokespersons on Justice, Equality and Law Reform to adjourn the Dáil to debate this important question.

The proposed action, scheduled for tomorrow, may pose a serious threat to the safety and security of the public. It undermines an important pillar of public confidence in the State. The action is unprecedented in the history of industrial relations between the Government of the day and the gardaí. It has the potential to erode the public's confidence in the Government's capacity to ensure law and order is maintained.

The Minister finds himself in a paradox. Deputy O'Donoghue has risen to power through his relentless and opportunistic pursuit of the last Minister for Justice. He may now be remembered for presiding over one of the most disturbing events in the history of the State, where the maintenance of law and order cannot be guaranteed and could potentially fall asunder.

The genesis of this conflict is complex. To a significant degree it is due to the fact that gardaí are not allowed become members of a trade union. This in turn means they cannot engage in negotiations which lead to wage agreements such as those reached in other parts of the public sector. It is a pity this has been allowed to develop and there can be no doubt that gardaí have a valid cause for complaint. It must seem unreasonable to fair-minded people that in effect the gardaí are forced to accept an agreement in which they have no voice. If they were allowed to be part of negotiations leading to pay agreements, the outcome might well be different and much more favourable to them. The Government should address this as a priority and it is now time to reconsider the restriction. Members of police forces in other countries are allowed to join trade unions without deleterious effects. The prohibition on trade union membership for gardaí dates to the foundation of the State, when it was more fragile than it is now. The reasons which led to that position being adopted have ceased to exist and I see no good reason to persist with the present regulations. The gardaí provide a vital service but other vital public sector services are provided by trade union members without any problems. Membership of a trade union with full participation in Congress and in the negotiation of agreements might go a long way to avoiding the disturbing vista opening before us tomorrow.

If there is still immutable resistance to the gardaí becoming trade union members, it is still vital that their concerns about exclusion from agreements be met. I suggest that the range of those allowed to be part of negotiations should be extended to include another category of participants, to cover groups such as the gardaí who have a legitimate case for being part of the discussions which lead to social partnership agreements.

In Opposition, Deputy O'Donoghue painted a picture in which all problems faced by his predecessors would vanish when he received his seal of office but, as Minister, he has stumbled from crisis to debacle. He is now learning the hard way that what one does in Opposition comes to visit one on becoming part of Government. This is especially true when an Opposition spokesperson is as gung-ho as the present Minister was.

Despite his ineptitude and recklessness in allowing this problem to develop and fester into a disturbing crisis, it is important to look for solutions. He and the Government should seek the help of an experienced industrial relations troubleshooter, someone who would be acceptable to both sides and who has experience of public sector matters. I am sure there are people of this calibre who, if approached, would be prepared to make their services available.

I understand the frustration of the gardaí at the manner in which their pay and conditions have not kept pace with various similar categories of workers. The job of a garda has become much more complex and taxing in the last 25 years, when Garda pay was similar to other groups such as teachers. The extent of this change can be gauged by the expansion and evolution in the education and training of gardaí, from a relatively low technology, six months training programme to a fully-fledged third level degree course covering a range of skills and technologies. The State has rightly been prepared to invest substantial sums into developing this course. It must now face up to the logic of producing highly qualified people who, whether they are gardaí or otherwise, must be paid the going rate they can command. If this does not happen, inevitably morale falls and standards drop. In the longer term, those who are talented and capable, the life blood of any organisation, move to jobs with better pay and conditions. While the gardaí are at the forefront of law and order problems, and face a series of associated risks, their job is much wider than that. The gardaí I consulted have assured me of the high standards and excellence of the service provided by our police force. They face difficult problems in tackling the drugs crisis and even in dealing with communities which, as many of us know, can from time to time be wearing.

To a large extent the present impasse is because there has been no review of Garda pay since 1981. Gardaí have benefited from wage agreements but the type of work they do has changed and these changes should be reflected in rates of pay. It is also important that the nature of Garda work, which is destined to continue to change, should be reviewed regularly and gardaí rewarded accordingly.

The basis for compromise and progress in this dispute lies in dealing with the questions of pay in phase one, followed by detailed negotiations on questions relating to the SMI at a later stage. The continuation of the dispute is in no one's interest. I appeal to both sides to again look at every aspect of their position with a view to finding a way out of the impasse. If tomorrow's protest goes ahead attitudes will inevitably harden and entrenched positions become more difficult to reverse. All disputes must be settled and inevitably are. The primary responsibility in this regard rests with the Minister. It is time he sought solutions and used his imagination to facilitate compromise.

The public should be considered in this dispute. I ask both sides to think of the needs of the general public and the common good. This may lead to a compromise and help avoid what would be a disturbing event tomorrow.

Mr. Sargent

This is an exceptional debate. In performing their duties gardaí are seen but not heard. They are reluctant to enter into a debate in which they might be seen to compromise their position as impartial upholders of the law.

Yesterday on the Order of Business the Taoiseach led us to believe that an increase of 39 per cent was being demanded and that this was the bottom line. Today I heard the other side of the story from garda representatives outside Leinster House. The figure of 39 per cent was mentioned in light of the fact that no progress had been made on their pay demands since l981. They are trying to reach a satisfactory compromise. A figure of 15 per cent would be closer to the mark and one on which they would take a stand. There is a need to set the record straight and we should not be misled into thinking that an increase of 39 per cent is being demanded. I am shocked that the Taoiseach would peddle such a figure.

There is a need to maintain public confidence and we should not do anything that would give rise to unnecessary anxiety and fear. Whenever anyone attempts to oppose Government policy, for example on EMU, one is quickly told not to rock the boat as the people watching will be upset that there is a lack of harmony. In this instance, the Government is in the eye of a storm of its own making.

In frank discussions the Minister informed Garda representatives that he could not countenance a pay increase unless certain guarantees and assurances were given. They informed him, in turn, having discussed the matter with their members, that they could deliver, that there would not be a knock on effect in terms of the agreements already in place. That is a civilised and an amicable way of approaching negotiations but the Minister is now giving the impression that no such guarantees and assurances were given. Many gardaí are of the view that he has changed his tune radically, that he has not been consistent and should enter into negotiations to break the impasse.

Gardaí were in no doubt that the Minister in Opposition when he espoused the concept of zero tolerance was very much on their side and that in Government would stop at nothing to ensure they had everything they needed to perform the tasks they were charged to do. They regarded him as their friend. That makes it all the more disappointing that he is now the one telling them that they will have to bite the bullet and that he has given his final word.

A sum of £27.9 million is provided in the Estimates for Garda overtime — often cited by gardaí as their lifeline — down from £43.899 million. The Minister could reduce his overtime bill further by entering into negotiations and arriving at a settlement.

There appears to be a two tier pay scale in the Garda Síochána. Gardaí based in our cities and along the Border have the option of working overtime whereas their colleagues in rural areas have few options to do so. One garda informed me that the payment of a gratuity was his last option to pay off a credit union loan. This is unacceptable.

On Friday many undesirable criminal elements will relish the prospect of making a quick killing. I hope the Army are on standby and will be able to deal with any crisis that may arise. The Celtic tiger has often been mentioned in this House and elsewhere. Government policy appears to be to overlook the losers — the voiceless and the marginalised. In this instance, the losers are members of the Garda Síochána on whom we depend and whom we often take for granted. We have much to lose in not negotiating and arriving at a settlement. I would support a change whereby gardaí would be represented by a trade union and, as happens in other countries, allowed to stand for elected office.

The considerable skills of members of the Garda Síochána are often taken for granted. In street demonstrations, for instance, they seek to avoid confrontation. If we continue to take that for granted we will have the mother of all confrontations because we all depend on the Garda Síochána.

Mr. Neville

The people know we are facing a deep crisis, which the Ceann Comhairle recognised by allowing this debate. I have pleaded with the Minister to be open and realistic in his negotiations. Industrial relations negotiations are quite dynamic. I have been involved in industrial relations for over 20 years in which people make claims with a view to arriving at a settlement much lower than their claim. It is totally unrealistic of the Minister to say the settlement area is 39 per cent. We all know the settlement area in a negotiation is much less than the claim but much higher than the Minister's offer. To get to that position one must have meaningful negotiations. The Minister recognises that Garda pay has fallen behind relative to its position with other groups ten years ago. That should be addressed.

I appreciate the Minister's difficulties in regard to managing the economy. However, people will recognise these are special circumstances which must be tackled and that the crisis we are facing tomorrow must be overcome. With only hours left, strong intervention must be made by the Minister. The beginning of meaningful negotiations would prevent the difficulties which might be experienced tomorrow.

There is a great deal of concern about this. When the Minister was in Opposition he was very good at heightening public concern about the level of crime, the lack of gardaí on the street and Garda numbers of only 10,000 or 11,000. The public and the Garda are concerned that only 25 per cent of that number will be at work tomorrow.

The Garda has the same right to negotiate as other groups in national negotiations such as the PCW. I raised that issue on a number of occasions in the Seanad. The Irish Conference of Professional and Service Associations should be party to all negotiations, which would cover the Army, the Garda and other smaller groups. That body should be allowed to represent those who are currently not represented at the negotiations and who rightly feel they do not have ownership of agreements. I appeal to the Minister to examine that for future negotiations. The ICPSA should be present at the negotiating table rather than handing people a decision in which they had no involvement.

I appeal to the Minister to immediately intervene in the situation. He should call PJ Stone and John Healy, whom I know very well, for meaningful negotiations and discussions this evening to ensure this crisis, which the Ceann Comhairle has recognised by allowing this debate, is headed off.

Proinsias De Rossa

There is no doubt we are facing a crisis tomorrow which has its origins in two factors. The first is the continued exclusion of the Garda from the negotiation of pay agreements over two decades. The second is the irresponsible and opportunistic promises by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when he was in Opposition. There is no doubt about that. I do not accept that, as the Minister and Taoiseach have implied, the gardaí outside the gates of this House are in some way lying about the promises made to them by the Minister when he was in Opposition. That is simply not the case.

The Minister should either indicate how he plans to resolve this crisis before tomorrow morning or offer his resignation to the House. He is the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and he has a responsibility to this House and the people to ensure there is adequate policing available to our citizens. It is not good enough to ramble on about nonsensical claims that gardaí are looking for an impossible increase of 39 per cent. That is not the case and continuing with such waffle is misleading and an excuse for inaction.

The Garda has achieved unprecedented public recognition of the situation in which it finds itself. Every Member knows how difficult it is to get this kind of debate on an issue of major importance. As far as I am aware, the last time the House was adjourned for such a debate was when the junior doctors were on the verge of withdrawing their services from hospitals and that crisis had to be resolved overnight.

This situation must be resolved by negotiation, which should be done tonight rather than tomorrow night after the country has been plunged into chaos. It is completely undignified for the Minister to have engineered a situation whereby gardaí must stand outside this House with placards. It is not appropriate for our gardaí to have to do that to get a just claim considered adequately by the Government and the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

Gardaí have a very difficult and dangerous job. They are expected on one hand to be social workers and on the other to be heroes. Every garda on the beat puts his or her life at risk. Unfortunately, some gardaí have lost their lives at the hands of criminals or paramilitary gangsters. It is inappropriate that men and women of that calibre should have to stand outside the gates of this House.

I do not have any inside information on the matter but I have no doubt that if an effort were made by the Government and the Minister to negotiate reasonably with the Garda, tomorrow's threatened action would not go ahead. As Deputy McManus said, if the Minister found it possible to make a reasonable offer, the Garda should suspend its action for a week or so to consider it. However, that requires a serious effort by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

It is way past time for the Garda to be allowed form a trade union. The idea that gardaí should be denied the right to join a trade union dates from a time in this century when trade unions and trade unionists were regarded as subversive, which is clearly not the case. The trade unions have participated in a responsible way over many years in partnership agreements with the Government and employers to assist the enormous economic development in this State. The Garda has co-operated in that process, albeit outside the actual negotiating process. It is way past time that they should be enabled to participate in the partnership negotiations and to form and register as a trade union.

The idea that the Garda or anybody else can be forced to work against their wishes is a nonsense in this day and age. While they can have regulations that they may not strike, it is clear from the action proposed tomorrow that once a workforce decides, regardless of the law, that it does not wish to make its services available there is no way to guarantee it will do so. Some device will be found to ensure its voice is heard. The gardaí have achieved that.

The Minister should recognise that this is not 1913 and that workers, whether they be gardaí, soldiers, doctors, nurses, teachers or road workers, cannot be starved into submission as employers attempted to do in 1913. This dispute must be resolved by negotiation. I expect that the Minster will make proposals regarding the resolution of the dispute and not give us the same kind of inane waffle which we have heard over the past two days.

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue)

There is no doubt that if tomorrow's planned action goes ahead we will face difficulties. I do not want to understate nor overstate them. Any comments made in the House about this most serious issue should be calm and measured. It does no side any credit to seek to use the issue to play politics when, however inadvertently, that course of action would only generate fear and alarm among the vulnerable in our community.

Mr. Higgins

(Mayo): What if the shoe was on the other foot?

Mr. Stagg

The Minister should have thought of that.

Mr. O'Donoghue

It is the solemn duty of all in this House to avoid making comments that would exaggerate the situation. If one message goes out from the House on foot of this debate it should be that no Government can yield to the demands of any group of public service employees in the face of action which can only have the effect of threatening the safety of the community. That is the position of this Government, as it has been of many previous Governments.

In this context, it is important that I repeat there is a substantial and generous offer on the table which is open to further negotiations. There is no refusal to talk and no doors are closed to the GRA. I respectfully suggest that the action contemplated by members of the force is unjustified, unwarranted and out of all proportion to the reality of the current situation. When regard is had to the potential harm to the force and the community it serves which this action could have, it is all the more disappointing that it is being contemplated.

This dispute will be resolved, as has every other dispute over pay. The Government is not in the business of trying to get one over on the GRA or any other representative association. The door to the negotiation table is open and tomorrow's planned action serves no useful purpose. Neither I nor the Government need any convincing that the pay issue in the Garda Síochána needs to be addressed. We are well aware that the force's pay has fallen behind and that is why a mechanism is in place to redress that.

Neither should we lose sight of the fact that we are not in a negotiating situation where each side has run out of road. I have made it clear that the 7 per cent offer remains on the table and this is subject to further negotiation within the overall parameters of public pay policy generally. Clearly, therefore, there is still some distance which can be travelled before either side adopts its final position. In those circumstances, it seems to me that tomorrow's action is all the more pointless.

When I came into office I was faced with two problems on the Garda representative front — that of pay and of the split in the GRA. The House will be aware that the long standing split was finally settled before Christmas. This pay dispute did not start today or yesterday or on the day the Government took office; it started before then. The Garda Association approached the previous Government seeking a pay commission, which was rejected. Indeed, the last Government made no arrangements to address Garda pay.

Mr. Stagg

That is when the Minister made his promises.

Mr. O'Donoghue

When in Opposition, I made it clear that the Garda pay issue had to be addressed in conjunction with the Garda associations.

Mr. Higgins

(Mayo): Address it.

Mr. O'Donoghue

Since coming into office I found a mechanism to discuss Garda pay, something the previous Government failed abysmally to do.

Mr. Higgins

(Mayo): Did you promise them 15 per cent?

Mr. O'Donoghue

Not only did I find a mechanism to start negotiations on pay, I also helped to resolve the problems which led to a split in the association.

In 1994, both the GRA and the Association of Garda Sergeants and Inspectors concluded an agreement under the local bargaining clause of the PESP-PCW pay agreement at the Garda Conciliation Council. The agreement provided for the pensionability of unsocial hours allowances, including night duty, Saturday, Sunday and public holiday allowances. The net effect of this agreement was to increase the superannuation benefits to the members who are in receipt of unsocial hours allowances by up to 20 per cent. The agreement also provided for a significant increase in the rate of designated post allowance paid to members in the relevant posts and a pensionable allowance, in lieu of non-pensionable overtime, was introduced for ministerial drivers. In return, the associations agreed to a number of measures, the principal one being to give discretion to the Garda Commissioner in relation to rostering. At that time, both the associations accepted that the agreement was in full and final settlement of the local bargaining clause of the PESP.

The GRA lodged a pay claim at the Garda Conciliation Council in September 1996 and in November 1996 wrote to the Minister of the day demanding a commission to review Garda pay. Other Garda associations joined them in their campaign for a commission. In February and March 1997, the GRA, together with the AGSI and the Association of Garda Superintendents, organised joint open meetings in Cork, Portlaoise, Sligo and Dublin. On 16 April 1997 the GRA held a protest march in Dublin.

The demand for a special commission on Garda pay was not enthusiastically accepted by the previous Government. An issue was raised here again as to whether I was the cause of this dispute. Aside altogether from the fact that the dispute had been festering long before 1996 or 1997, I set out my party's position in various correspondences with colleagues and others. I said we would discuss the question of a commission on pay on our return to office but it would be in the context of the strategic management initiative and the implementation of our crime policy. If required I can open that correspondence. That correspondence was written in the face of an imminent general election. The politically expedient thing to do would have been to say we would have a commission on pay and we would give members an increase but I did neither. If need be, I can produce the evidence. I am disappointed Opposition Members ascribe to me offers I allegedly made to the Garda Síochána at that time without producing any evidence to substantiate them.

I met the various Garda associations on a number of occasions and explained the Report of the Steering Group on the Efficiency and Effectiveness of the Garda Síochána held out the best prospect of furthering the association's claims for an increase in pay. In face of correspondence I have before me, I vehemently reject the accusation that I created high expectations or was in any way the cause of this dispute.

On 26 November 1997 the Government published the Report of the Steering Group on the Efficiency and Effectiveness of the Garda Síochána and decided to implement the programme of change recommended in the report by establishing a steering group to develop and implement the overall programme of change.

One of the tasks of that steering group was to oversee the bottom-up review of the force. That involves the establishment of an in-depth examination to reach conclusions on the optimum number, structure and deployment of the gardaí and the appropriate mix between gardaí and civilians. Top priority was afforded to this task and a subcommittee of that steering group was established immediately to deal with it. The chairman of that subcommittee, Mr. Declan Brennan, is a member of that steering group. The chairman of the bottom-up review, Mr. Brennan, was appointed to chair the discussions between the official and staff representatives on the issue of pay.

On 23 December l997 Mr. Brennan convened a joint introductory meeting of the four Garda Associations and the official side. Commencing in January l998 each of the four associations held a number of meetings with the official side to set out their case for a pay increase and backed this up with written submissions to Mr. Brennan.

The official side gave its response on 1 April l998 at separate meetings with the GRA and AGSI. The response was that an increase of 5.5 per cent could be offered and that there might be the prospect of further increases which would be conditional on obtaining some productivities and savings. Both associations rejected this offer. They withdrew from the pay discussion process and embarked on campaigns of protest action.

The chairperson of the pay discussions subsequently invited the GRA and the AGSI to a meeting to consider the suspension of the industrial action and the resumption of the pay discussions. The meeting with the GRA was held on 16 April and the GRA indicated it was unable to resume the pay discussions until the official side's offer was increased. It suggested that an increased offer of 7 per cent would be expected. The AGSI, at a meeting on 17 April, also indicated that an increased offer was necessary for its resumption of the pay discussions and the deferral of protest action.

Mr. Brennan made a recommendation that the offer to the associations be increased to 7 per cent indicating he was satisfied, based on the discussions to date, that productivity discussions due to take place would yield savings that would justify an increase of 7 per cent at that stage. He was satisfied an offer of this amount would form a basis for the resumption of the pay discussions. This recommendation was accepted by my colleague, the Minister for Finance, and myself on 18 April and conveyed immediately to the general secretaries of both associations. On 23 April 1998 the AGSI returned to the negotiation table and discussions on its pay claim have resumed. The GRA rejected the new offer and decided to continue on a campaign of protest action. The threatened abstention from duty tomorrow appears to be part of that campaign.

It is important to stress what is at issue here. The GRA has sought a pay increase of 39 per cent. By any standards that is excessive. The official side made an offer of 5.5 per cent, which is within the general PCW range of settlements, and offered to participate in ongoing discussions to identify if further progress could be achieved in the context of productivity and savings. The official side's good intent has been signalised by the enhanced offer of 7 per cent based on productivity expectations. It is unfortunate that the GRA cannot appreciate the progress which was made.

My Government colleagues and I have appealed on several occasions to the GRA to desist from the protest action and to return to the pay discussions. Yesterday evening I met the officer board of the association and renewed the appeal. I stressed once again that the opportunity for further discussions on pay remains open. I also stressed that no progress could be made on the issue of pay until the protest action was suspended and the association agreed to return to the negotiating table.

The real problem is that the GRA wishes to have its pay dealt with outside the confines of national pay policy as set out in the PCW and Partnership 2000. The last Government did not agree to this and this Government cannot agree to it either. I cannot see any future Government agreeing to deal with the pay of any group of public employees outside the parameters of the national pay policy.

The Government fully recognises the legitimate pay aspirations of the gardaí have to be addressed and I have been entirely consistent on that, but it is firm in its resolve that it must be in the context of public service pay policy. Any settlement above the general norm would inevitably lead to catch up claims by other workers with consequent undermining of the national economy. I would be pleased to clarify any issue if it would help to bring the association back to the table. My officials and I will remain ready at all times to consider any issue.

As I explained, I am making every effort to encourage the Garda Representative Association to return to negotiations rather than to pursue industrial action. I call on everyone in this House to join with me in urging the Garda associations to pursue the avenue of negotiation rather than confrontation. I repeat my request to the GRA to call off the protest action and return to the negotiations table — the only place where the pay issue can be settled.

The Garda Síochána is a particularly dedicated and committed police force with a high international reputation. While I know many members feel they have a legitimate grievance regarding their pay, I also know they will be very reluctant to resort to such industrial action which could endanger the vulnerable members of the community, when the door to negotiations is still open. Nobody will gain if gardaí stay away from work tomorrow. The public will be put at risk, their confidence and trust in the gardaí will be totally undermined, the reputation of the force will suffer and the members will not gain anything. In so far as contingency planning is concerned, we must prepare for the worse.

I discussed the matter with the Garda Commissioner yesterday and he was confident he could provide an adequate police service with the resources he expected to be available. The Garda Representative Association when questioned by the media on this issue has given assurances about the provisions of emergency services.

There have been demands from some Opposition speakers for a detailed account of the arrangements for Friday. Those Deputies know full well that such detailed information is never given for security reasons. We cannot expect the gardaí to broadcast their plans to criminals. That applies on Friday as much as any other day. I can assure Deputies that the Garda Commissioner has drawn up plans to deal with the situation. Obviously, he has to be flexible. Deputy Higgins can be assured that neither the Garda Commissioner nor the Garda Representative Association know how many gardaí will report for duty tomorrow. While I cannot give full details, I can say that the Garda authorities have drawn up plans to address specific issues, such as general patrolling, response to calls, general and specific security, banks, airports, communications centres, court attendances and prisoner escorts. Deputies will have read in today's newspapers that, as a precautionary measure, arrangements were made to bring forward to today cash deliveries that might normally take place on a Friday.

I also remind Deputies that in addition to ordinary gardaí who will report for duty tomorrow, the Garda Commissioner has over 850 gardaí who are still on probation but have full powers as well as over 200 trainee gardaí. The Garda Representative Association stated that these gardaí will not be taking part in any action. There are also 2,300 gardaí at sergeant rank and above. I understand the Garda Commissioner has arranged for the Defence Forces to be on stand by to be called out in aid of the civil power if necessary.

Deputy Higgins said the Garda Commissioner should appear on television and radio. The commissioner is holding a press conference this afternoon on policing arrangements and to answer questions about his plans. No one can guarantee the provision of a fully normal police service tomorrow and obviously there may be some disruption to non-essential services. This matter can only be resolved at the negotiating table. It cannot be resolved on the streets or by staying away from work.

Two constructive suggestions were made by Deputy Neville and Deputy De Rossa who raised the issue of involving the Garda in national pay negotiations. Gardaí have benefited in the past from all national pay agreements. However, I am willing to consider the Deputies' suggestion in conjunction with my Cabinet colleagues and the Garda associations if they return to the negotiating table. The associations have been told already that the Government is willing to explore this matter in advance of any future national pay discussions.

Suggestions were made to the effect that there were insufficient meetings with the GRA about this matter. However, the door of no other Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has been as open to the GRA as mine since I commenced my tenure of office. I met the association on more occasions in a short time than any other Minister. The GRA is aware that the door is not only open to its officer board but also to its central executive whom I met collectively on a number of occasions.

I reissue my appeal to the Garda Representative Association to understand that only dialogue and industrial negotiation can resolve this matter. Ultimately, that is precisely what will happen and it may as well happen sooner rather than later.