Vol. 495 No. 7
51 Mr. Hayes asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment when she will receive the report from the interdepartmental group on a minimum wage; and when she will introduce legislation on the implementation of a minimum wage. [21734/98]
55 Ms Shortall asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the progress, if any, made to date on the implementation of the national minimum wage; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [21126/98]
81 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the progress, if any, made by the interdepartmental group on implementing the report of the minimum wage commission; if the Government will introduce legislation providing for the introduction of a minimum wage of the level and within the timeframe recommended by the commission; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [21633/98]
138 Mrs. Owen asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment when she will receive the report from the interdepartmental group on a minimum wage; and when she will introduce legislation on the implementation of a minimum wage. [21845/98]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 51, 55, 81 and 138 together.
The introduction of a national minimum hourly wage is a key commitment in the programme for Government which I intend to implement. The importance which the Government and I attach to this commitment is indicated by the fact that within weeks of coming into office we established the National Minimum Wage Commission to make recommendations on the issue. The report of the commission, which was published last April, was an important stage in the process of achieving our objectives in this regard. I welcomed the commission's recommendation for the introduction of a single national minimum hourly wage and the Government intends to introduce legislation to this effect within the timeframe recommended.
In the context of the commission's report a number of complex issues were identified which require further analysis and study. For that reason, the Government established an interdepartmental group of officials whose terms of reference are to assist in formulating proposals and a plan of action in respect of a national minimum wage and to report to the Government as early as possible. The group commenced work in early April and has considered a broad range of issues. It has engaged independent consultants to undertake an expert analysis, as recommended by the commission, of the likely impact of the implementation of the national hourly minimum wage on employment, competitiveness and inflation, at both sectoral and national levels.
As the study commissioned by the group will not be completed until March 1999, its final report will not be completed until May 1999. However, the group has recently submitted an interim report to me and it is my intention, subject to Government approval, to publish this. It details the progress to date of the work of the group and identifies a range of issues related to the implementation of the national minimum wage. It is my intention that the interim report will also serve as a basis for further consultation with the social partners on some of the specific issues pinpointed in the report. I have already met with a broad spectrum of the social partners on the issue as part of the ongoing consultative process.
Given that the work of the interdepartmental committee will not be completed until May next year, that time is fast running out if we are to introduce legislation for a national minimum wage by April 2000 and no such legislation is listed for this term, does the Minister accept that instead of setting up the original commission and delaying the matter as she is doing now she should have established the interdepartmental group in the first instance? Will she give an assurance that, irrespective of the interdepartmental group recommendations, the Government is still committed to introducing a national minimum wage in April 2000?
We are committed to introducing a minimum wage in April 2000. Work on the legislation has begun. Initially it was felt we might not be able to do it through enabling legislation because what we would wish to do by way of secondary legislation would be outside the scope of such provisions. However, I am now advised we can proceed with enabling legislation and the preliminary work was begun some time ago in the Department. I hope that will be completed by the beginning of next year and the legislation can go ahead even if the final report is not to hand.
Among the issues we have to examine is that of relativity — that was one of the concerns mentioned to me by the social partners. ICTU has given a commitment that it will not seek a relativity impact in relation to the introduction of a national minimum wage. There are also issues about how one defines remuneration, etc., which is why it was necessary to set up the interdepartmental group. The first report has come to hand and it is good. I hope to bring it to Government within the next two weeks and publish it as quickly as I can thereafter.
Is the Minister satisfied that all Departments and agencies under their aegis are currently offering wages at least at the level of the recommended minimum wage, given that the Government has accepted in principle that the minimum a person should be in receipt of is £4.40 per hour? Does the Government intend to introduce tax allowances which would enable a single person in receipt of the minimum wage to be exempt from tax?
On the second matter, we must move in that direction. It is ludicrous that a single person begins to pay tax at £78 per week and in that context people do not have a great incentive to take up employment. To move the tax threshold from £78 per week to £176 per week will take time and we must make progress in that regard this year.
I do not have statistics for how many people in the State sector are paid less than £4.40 per hour. Many home helps do not receive that amount — I doubt they get that much in any of the health boards. I am not certain if other State employees receive substantially less than that but I hope that by April 2000 everyone who works for the State will receive that much, because it has an obligation to pay the minimum wage which it advocates.
The commission said this minimum wage would add 4 per cent to the national wage bill, which was about £800 million at the time it produced its report. Since then, wage rates have substantially increased for a number of reasons, such as shortages. Among the issues being examined by the ESRI is the impact this will have on particular sectors or firms. When it completes its analysis our data will be clearer and more up to date.
Is it not the case that the Department of Finance is anxious to push the introduction of the minimum wage as far into the future as possible? Is the Minister not concerned that we are going back over the same ground covered by the commission? Should she not simply introduce the minimum wage? She has available to her the example of a detailed British Bill, which has been seen by everyone in the House. Given the undercurrents of dissent in her party, there is grave concern that this Government will not last until 2000 and that the Minister, at the behest of elements in ISME and the SFA, is kicking the issue to touch. She will be out of office when another Government has to deal with this problem.
We are the first Government to deal with the problem. If it was as simple as the Deputy sometimes makes it sound, his party's Government would have tackled it a long time ago.
We started to tackle it.
We dealt with it in Partnership 2000.
We have a national wage agreement which does not run out until April 2000 and we cannot start introducing changes in the middle of that process. I do not think anyone would suggest we should do so, and neither did the report. The model in Britain is different from what is proposed here — the rate is much lower and young people are excluded, so it is not as progressive or as well remunerated as the rate recommended in the commission's report. The commission said we should examine the impact on employment and competitiveness and what happened in the UK, which is why the ESRI is doing its analysis.
The Deputy can be assured that the minimum wage will be introduced by this Government. Many people would like to see me out of Government for various reasons — I can speculate on some of those — but I assure the Deputy this Government will be in power in April 2000 to implement the measure. I appreciate the Opposition want to get into Government for other reasons, but I assure the Deputy that I do not give up easily. He need not be concerned; I will still be here at that time so he can continue to ask me questions.
In view of the fact that one of the recommendations in the commission's report is that young people receiving training in a company should be eligible to receive 70 per cent, followed by 80 per cent and then 90 per cent, of the minimum wage during the period of training, what progress has been made in discussions the Minister has had with IBEC, the Small Firms' Association or the representative bodies of private companies with regard to structuring their training schemes and programmes and assisting companies to do that so that when the minimum wage is introduced, young people genuinely receiving training can be identified and that this will not be used as a way to pay people cheap wages? Has the Minister made any progress on that matter?
One of the issues we discussed when I met IBEC and representatives from the Construction Industry Federation was the impact of this measure on training, existing rates, differentials and so on. I agree with Deputy Owen that we must take a realistic view of training rather than the widest view. Some people argue that a person is being trained from the day he or she begins their first job, even though that person has specific skills and can do the job, to avoid paying the £4.40 per hour minimum wage. We have to finalise our view on these and other issues in the context of the proposed legislation. Training means training, and if companies do not have appropriate inhouse training facilities and programmes, they will be unable to avail of the 70 per cent, 80 per cent and 90 per cent for the three year period of training. They will have to show, to some satisfaction, that there is a genuine training element involved in what they are doing.
Will the Minister undertake a survey of the wage rates being paid by various Departments, including those paid to Dáil secretaries, and the rates being paid by the various agencies associated with Departments? In particular, will she inquire into the heritage service, Dúchas, which advertised recently for staff at a rate less than the minimum wage?
The minimum wage is not yet enshrined in legislation so there are no legal obligations in that respect. I accept the State must give example, but this is not yet a legal requirement. If I can I will give the Deputy the type of data he requests; I hope the ESRI will produce that data. The intention of its analysis to provide firm and sectoral data on how this will impact across the different sections. The early indications from the Departments are that it will not adversely impact on them because they are paying rates either close to this rate or what will be approximate to it by April 2000. Notwithstanding the fact that Dáil secretaries are not well paid, I do not believe any of them are paid less than £176 per week, which is what we are talking about. I will get the data for the Deputy if I can, but I am sure he could obtain it himself by way of parliamentary question.
I recognise there is no legal obligation on anybody to pay the minimum wage being recommended, but the Government wants to introduce this rate as a matter of principle, and I welcome that commitment. For example, agencies and Departments offering jobs should, at the very least, offer that as a starting rate. Will the Minister agree that, as a means of preparing for the implementation of the minimum wage, the Government and State agencies should at least know the rates they are paying to staff so that they can begin to gradually improve those rates if they are below the minimum rate?
Will the Minister, who will sponsor this legislation, give a commitment to the House that sufficient moneys will be made available to those Departments not currently paying their staff a minimum wage to allow them do so? I refer in particular to health care workers and home helps.
I am delighted Deputy Owen recognises that I will be the Minister bringing in this legislation and that she is more confident of that than Deputy Broughan.
The Minister is in the process of doing it.
I cannot give that undertaking. As I stated earlier, the national wage agreement does not run out until April 2000 and we cannot interfere in that process, whether it is in respect of public or private sector workers. The feedback from the interdepartmental working group would indicate that the impact will be minimal. Most State employees are paid in excess of £176 per week, or will be by April 2000. An area on which it will have an impact is the home help service and provision will have to be made in due course to ensure home help workers get the minimum wage.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
