John Bruton
Question:3 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent meeting with the social partners. [1210/99]
Ceisteanna–Questions. - Meeting with Social Partners.
John Bruton
Question:4 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach when the annual meeting of all parties to Partnership 2000, convened by the Taoiseach as provided for in the agreement, will be held in 1999; when the last meeting was held; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1218/99]
John Bruton
Question:5 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the steps, if any, he proposes to take in 1999 to further develop the social partnership process. [1219/99]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:6 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the plenary meeting of Partnership 2000 central review committee on 26 January 1999; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1915/99]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3 to 6, inclusive, together.
I attach high priority to maintaining close ongoing contact with the social partners, on both a formal and informal basis. My most recent formal engagements took place in the context of the inaugural meetings of NESC and NESF on 4 and 12 November respectively, on which I have already reported to the House. In addition, I chair one of the quarterly Partnership 2000 plenary meetings each year. The most recent was last July's plenary and my next such engagement will probably be in July this year.
The 26 January plenary meeting focused principally on the themes of competitiveness and agriculture, forestry and food, including rural exclusion. Also on the agenda were presentations on budget 1999 and the draft report of the expert group on child care.
Throughout this year, the focus will be on the twin aims of completing the implementation of Partnership 2000 and paving the way to a successor agreement. In that latter regard, the NESC has been asked to prepare a new strategy report which would form the basis for a successor, while the NESF has been asked to take on a new role in developing policies and programmes to tackle long-term unemployment, poverty and social exclusion. It will also have an important contribution to make in evaluating the effectiveness of policies within the context of both the social partnership agreements and the national anti-poverty strategy.
Another key priority throughout 1999 will be the promotion of partnership at workplace level. This work will be led by the National Centre for Partnership, in which both IBEC and ICTU are active participants.
Will the Taoiseach agree the issue of literacy should be a central concern of any new partnership agreement? Is he aware a recent OECD study shows that 17 per cent of those between the ages of 16 and 25, who were recently educated, have literacy problems? Is he aware many employers cannot fill vacancies with people who would be willing to fill them, because those concerned, even for relatively unskilled jobs, who must be able to read instructions, are unable to do so. Literacy is probably the root cause of at least half of the current long-term unemployment.
Literacy is a very important matter. I am not sure it has ever been addressed at the quarterly meetings. It has been ignored for a long time. I am pleased this Government has particularly focused on it. There was a lack of resources for education programmes and training. In 1998 the literacy budget was doubled and again in 1999. All the surveys of the long-term unemployed have shown that illiteracy is a major problem, not so much for younger people but older people.
It is also a problem for younger people. The surprising aspect of the OECD finding is the extent of illiteracy among younger people.
It is certainly a problem in the long-term unemployment category and I remember being involved in a number of reports when Minister for Labour. It was shown up then as a major problem. Given that the literacy budget doubled last year and this year, it is giving a strong focus to doing something about the problem. People are happy to attend adult education programmes. The Adult Education Centre, Mountjoy Square, which has students from the greater Dublin area, is actively involved and extending its classes. I do not know whether the matter has been on the agenda for any of the plenary meetings but I will mention it because it is important. Many employers are finding it extremely difficult to get people even in unskilled posts and in the lower clerical posts which require some but not enormous skills.
Will the Taoiseach agree that many of the unskilled jobs currently available will not be available five years from now to people who do not have adequate literacy skills because of the nature of the technological change in the workplace? The jobs of many of those at work are at risk because their literacy skills are not up to standard. There is a need to invest in literacy as a job preservation measure. Will the Taoiseach further agree that this issue needs to be addressed in social partnership? For example we need to re-organise our teaching resources to ensure there is a point in the curriculum beyond which children cannot pass unless they have learnt to read and write adequately, perhaps the first year in secondary school. As the ASTI is proposing, there should be an evaluation year when people would catch up in certain basic skills in which they may have slipped behind.
Will the Taoiseach agree if that is to be done, it can only be done in the context of a comprehensive pay negotiation because it has pay and conditions implications for teachers, for instance? Will he agree that literacy is an issue which should be made a central part of the pay negotiations, not that he should just mention it, which I am glad he is willing to do, but that he should try to drive this issue as one of the central planks in ensuring that we do not have 200,000 people unemployed despite the fact that most advertised vacancies cannot be filled? There is a reason for that and it is literacy.
I would not consider literacy the main reason. There are many reasons. Deputy Bruton and I were at the same seminar recently where we listened to the views of employers who have vacancies. However, literacy is very important and the Minister, Deputy O'Dea, has been highlighting that, and seeking resources to provide for adequate training. Deputy Dermot Ahern informs me that in the NAPS, literacy is the subject of a special programme and special discussions to try to do more to assist the long-term unemployed. What Deputy Bruton is seeking is happening. It is not central to the pay discussions but if we could get it as part of the social partners' drive, no doubt it would help. Many of the voluntary community groups make literacy an issue.
In terms of the broader subject, as Deputy Bruton says people in employment falling behind is an issue. I am continually urging employers to continue training and retraining to up date skills and re-skill their staff. That is an important aspect.
However, literacy is a major problem for those who will clearly not have a chance, even when jobs are available. That is why we have provided substantial resources in that area. I am glad the NAPS are also doing this. I know it is included in the Action Programme for the Unemployed on which the Tánaiste has been working with other Ministers. Literacy is clearly an issue and we should do everything we can. Deputy Bruton is asking me to have it included in some form or other in the debate on social partnership and I will certainly look at that.
At the meeting of 26 January, was it formally decided or is it now the Taoiseach's view that all of the outstanding items and relative pay claims associated with the PCW have now been completed? If that is the case, can he indicate the progress, if any, which has been made with regard to performance related pay in the public sector?
All of the issues are not out of the way yet, but the list is fairly short at this stage. There are discussions going on in most of the remaining ones. There could only have been about ten on the last list I saw, but most of them were very small.
It is the small ones which cause the trouble.
There are one or two which are still in the course of discussion and dialogue which have not yet been resolved. I hope they will be.
In terms of the progress on the discussions, the meetings have started with the public services committee of ICTU, as Deputy Quinn will be aware. They have set in motion the exploratory process about which I spoke to the Deputy before Christmas. People are approaching the discussions not with a detailed blueprint of how they can get pay on performance but to see if they can come to an agreement as to how this issue can be dealt with in the future. There is no proposal yet designed but there is broad agreement that it is well worth exploring to see if they can find a way which would both take into account the desires of workers for fair increases and at the same time take account of the Government's wish not to breach pay guidelines.
At the July plenary meeting or earlier last year the Taoiseach talked about the necessity for a new system for pay determination in the public sector – it was in the context of social partnership generally. Do I take it from the Taoiseach's reply on the desirability of performance related pay agreements in the public sector that it is the intention of the Government, as one of the participants in Partnership 2000 and in the preparation for the next programme, that the next programme, if one is to be agreed prior to ratification by the various parts, will contain proposals and arrangements for performance related pay in the public sector?
That is the Government's desire if we can achieve it in agreement with the social partners. There has been much discussion about this in recent years. Those in favour of it are prepared to negotiate a broad blueprint to see if it is operable. People not in favour will always ask "How can you have performance pay in the public sector?" and I have listened to that for 20 years. It has not been tried and we are going to make an effort to see if we can have performance pay which can satisfy the employees and at the same time not breach public service pay guidelines.
Is the Taoiseach's reference to a new system of pay determination in the public sector part and parcel of performance related pay or are they two separate things?
It is all part of the one system.
Have there been discussions with the social partners on the regionalisation of the country as part of the partnership agreement? I heard that it was proposed to have consultations.
Deputy Bruton asked about literacy and the Taoiseach responded by saying that there were other issues, not just literacy, which could explain long-term unemployment. What other headings would he add to literacy? For instance, would homelessness, other gaps in education and low pay be included in his list? Will he indicate in his preparation for the new partnership if indicators, other than GNP and GDP, which would show trends in many of those problem areas, could be included so that we will see a more rounded picture of the success of the partnership?
On regionalisation, the answer is "yes". There are questions tabled on that so perhaps we could leave that to the discussion about Agenda 2000. However, there has been discussion and dialogue with the social partners.
There are many areas outlined in the unemployment action programme and in the various NAPS schemes. They relate to people losing benefits when they take up jobs, the distance from the work place and educational disadvantage of one form or another. There are, however, many other difficulties where employers are finding that many people are opting for part-time employment. Listening to some of the major employers the other day, it was interesting to hear that the only way they can fill full-time pensionable jobs is to make agreements that people will work two or three days per week. Even when they can offer contracts for five-day weeks and 52 weeks per year, people do not want them. That is the case for many of the big organisations and it is a change from how it used to be.
Of the two seminars this weekend, the CERT one involved 7,000 vacancies in 1999 and at Opportunities 1999 there were 21,500 vacancies on offer in January 1999. Clearly there are difficulties in the labour market and that even applies to Civil Service posts. When the Civil Service recruited for staff a decade ago almost 50,000 people took the examinations and now fewer than 10,000 take them. Of the successful applicants, we are lucky to get one in two who are still interested six months later. The circumstances are entirely different from what they were a decade ago.
(Dublin West): With the experience of the last ten years, does the Taoiseach agree that partnership is one way traffic with most concessions being made by workers to employers? What does it say about partnership that Mr. Eric Fleming, a trade union official, was not renominated by the Minister of State, Deputy Kitt, to the Health and Safety Authority? Is the Taoiseach aware that there is a strong suspicion among construction workers that the reason he was not renominated was that he was so outspoken about the high death rate on construction sites and the cavalier attitude of some employers to health and safety? There is a suspicion that pressure was brought to bear by so-called partners not to renominate him. Is it a good example of partnership that many construction workers continue to be pressurised by certain subcontractors to work in the black economy and thereby forfeit not just their obligation to pay tax but their rights and entitlements? On wage levels and the tight control of workers' pay rises, what signal is sent by the fact that workers cannot afford to put a roof over their head and there are no constraints on so-called partners, developers and landowners? How will this impact on future arrangements in regard to partnership?
I hold a different view. I remember the time, prior to social partnership, when the unemployment rate was 18 per cent, when there were over 50 in the classroom, when the high tax rate was 65 per cent and when there were few, if any, opportunities. It was a case of them and us and there was confrontation practically every day outside the gates of Leinster House.
(Dublin West): There was a world recession.
Successive Governments have worked with organised labour which has now a meaningful say. It no longer has to beat the drum and shout to the sky. It has had policy changed and led the way for many other countries. While house prices are high, a decade ago only 9,500 were built. Last year 41,500 were built. In the mid to late 1980s local authority houses remained empty. In three successive years 46,000, 44,000 and 46,000 people emigrated. There has been net immigration in the past three years. Things have changed for the better, although there is still work to be done.
The Taoiseach said that the labour market is stretched. CERT, the State agency charged with responsibility of filling vacancies, has 7,000 vacancies. What is the Government's attitude to the announcement that asylum seekers will be allowed to work while their applications are being processed? Has progress been made on that matter? It would ease CERT's problem.
The Government will make its decision in due course. I understand that work permits are now granted in 95 per cent of cases. The Deputy will recall that the figure was about 15 per cent.
Has a decision been made?
Not yet.
The Government will not make a decision.
It will.
When?
Shortly.