Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 5 Mar 2013

Vol. 795 No. 1

Leaders' Questions

Deputy Micheál Martin

There are clearly elements of the renegotiated Croke Park agreement that are very unfair to certain workers, a fact that is being made worse every day by a very cynical divide and conquer strategy that is being deployed by the Government. We have gardaí, health care workers, nurses, emergency medical technicians, Army personnel and many more who seem to have been singled out for particular treatment. The situation for those workers is deeply unfair. Adding to that unfairness, side deals are being done on an ongoing basis. Fire personnel and prison officers are retaining double pay on a Sunday while their front-line colleagues, the gardaí, EMTs and nurses, are being treated in a much more vindictive way.

A health care assistant on a gross income of €27,000 per annum faces a cut of 8%, meaning a reduction in his weekly pay packet of €50. Workers earning between €150,000 and €185,000 are getting the same percentage cut as the health care worker on €27,000. That is not fair. The reason for it is because the entire deal revolves around the make-up of a person's pay. Two people on the same income according to their payslips at the end of a week will see a considerably different impact on their take-home pay as a result of this deal, depending on how it is made up between core pay and shift work premiums.

There are thousands of shift workers who are on low pay and who work in the front-line services and part of their normal core hours is to work Sunday and night-time. They depend on the premium payments they receive from these hours as part of their normal pay and would have secured their mortgages on that basis. I would ask the Taoiseach a basic question. Why has the Government decided to single out these workers - health care workers, gardaí, emergency medical technicians, nurses, Army personnel - for such unfair treatment as a result of this deal?

The Taoiseach

Deputy Martin should reflect on the situation that has evolved here. In view of the requirement to have an extra €3 billion of savings by 2015, the take from public pay is €1 billion between now and 2015, as 35% of spending goes on the public pay bill.

The situation is that the unions and management negotiated this over a number of weeks and the LRC put forward its propositions to the unions for their consideration, analysis and decision. It is normal procedure, where unions negotiate on behalf of their members, that letters of clarification issue to unions about specific issues, and that is what has happened here. Nobody is being treated unfairly here. I suggest that the best course of action is to allow the period of reflection and analysis that unions require so that they can discuss this with their members and make their decision in the way that unions do, each in its own voting pattern.

The outcome of the LRC paper will achieve a good balance of equity across public servants given the complexity and range of diversity of public service roles. Essentially, they seek to ensure that those who earn most pay most. Those earning over €65,000 are facing direct pay cuts and those cuts are progressive - up to 10% for those who earn in excess of €185,000. While those earning under €65,000 will have delays in increments, they will not have their pay cut directly. The elements of the LRC paper have been set out. While all public servants are asked to make a contribution, those who can best afford it are being asked to make the biggest contribution.

Front-line staff complained that they were being targeted and it is now clear that they are not being targeted. Their Saturday premia have been retained and the unions in the talks successfully mitigated the proposed reduction in Sunday premia, which is from double time to time and three quarters. Other sectors made significant and proportionate contributions to the overall savings, including teachers and prison officers. It is clear that all public service workers take some impact in this agreement, not only front-line workers. I would suggest that the process is well under way for unions to consider, analysis and decide on their view on the Labour Relation Commission paper, and I hope that they do that.

Deputy Martin will be aware that we made numerous comments about the importance of staying in at the negotiations and discussions. It is clear that the unions that stayed there made an impact in terms of adjustments. The Minister has made it clear that the provisions of the agreement relating to pay, productivity and reform, assuming that they are ratified, will apply to everybody and nobody is being treated unfairly in this context. Everybody has got a contribution to make. Those who earn most and those who have most will make the biggest contribution.

Deputy Micheál Martin

One of the experienced representatives in the nursing field, for example, has described this deal as the most regressive and draconian deal that he personally ever witnessed.

I asked the Taoiseach a simple question about the health care worker on €27,000 who is now being cut €50 a week whereas the exact same percentage cut is being applied to someone on between €150,000 and €185,000. That is not fair. On any analysis of a deal, people have an obligation to face up to the realities. As I stated, there are thousands of shift workers on low incomes who will suffer much more than anybody else as a result of this deal. They are earning under €65,000. I have instanced the healthcare worker. Middle-ranking nurses will face a loss of up to €80 per week, and middle-ranking gardaí as well.

It seems there is a cynicism at the heart of how this has been organised in terms of the strategy of ensuring that the Government gets the votes to get the deal over the line. The Taoiseach's comments speak to that cynicism in the sense of the divide and conquer strategy, where the approach was that the Government would ensure those who left the talks early would be punished. For example, how can the Government speak of equalising start-up pay for teachers but expect nurses to start their careers at 80% of the basic income? An Army private is losing anything up to 14% while a general is losing 5%. There are clear inequities in how this is working out for many on low incomes. The Taoiseach should look at that. There is the business of the Government doing a side deal with the fire brigade and its staff can have their double pay on a Sunday, but gardaí, notwithstanding all their difficult work, and that they put their lives on the line, it will not get the same treatment.

Deputy Mattie McGrath

It is disgraceful.

Deputy Micheál Martin

That is what is going on here. It is the same with the prison officers, nurses, health care workers or emergency medical technicians.

An Ceann Comhairle

I thank Deputy Martin.

Deputy Micheál Martin

That is not fair. There must be a systemic approach. One cannot merely state that the deal one gets depends on what union one is in. That is not good enough.

Deputy Finian McGrath

They shafted the workers again.

The Taoiseach

It is advisable that we in this House express our respect for the trade unions which go about their business in representing their members in the best way possible.

(Interruptions).

The Taoiseach

Some nurses were represented at the talks; others were not.

Deputy Micheál Martin

It is stacked up against them.

Deputy Timmy Dooley

The gardaí are not allowed to be represented.

An Ceann Comhairle

Please allow a reply.

The Taoiseach

The case Deputy Martin mentions may be a person who works a very different pattern of work than an average worker every week and may be at the extreme end of increments and premium payments. The point here is that these negotiations were the first and the most detailed. They were spread out across the spectrum, from those who earn the most to all of those under €65,000-----

Deputy Mattie McGrath

Not true.

The Taoiseach

-----who are not having any direct pay cuts applied to them. Everybody will make a contribution to reaching the target set here, which is about sorting out the public finances, getting the deficit down to 3% by 2015 and making arrangements that every person in the public sector, from the highest to the latest recruit, would make a contribution towards what is essentially a national challenge.

Nobody underestimates the difficulty that this imposes for anybody, but these talks were the widest, the most detailed and the most targeted.

Deputy Micheál Martin

They were targeted. I accept that.

The Taoiseach

They are the fairest across the board because they have been negotiated by the unions who clearly have made fundamental adjustments to original propositions.

Deputy Mattie McGrath

Sweet deals.

The Taoiseach

In having that respect for all of those unions, I now want them to have the time to assess-----

Deputy Mattie McGrath

They did not even give Mr. Jack O'Connor any time.

The Taoiseach

-----consider, decide and give their decision in respect of the paper and the propositions put before them by the Labour Relations Commission.

This is, essentially, as the Minister has pointed out, the last of these adjustments and there will not be another one. The detail of the programme has already been set out-----

A Deputy

There will be another programme.

The Taoiseach

-----in the paper published by the Labour Relations Commission.

Deputy Gerry Adams

Easter is at the end of this month and we are only three years away-----

(Interruptions).

An Ceann Comhairle

Please.

Deputy Gerry Adams

We are only three years away from the centenary of the 1916 Easter Rising, not the 1916 Christmas rising, and yet the future of the last headquarters of the 1916 leaders in Moore Street, which is an iconic place in our history, is uncertain and still under threat from developers.

The Taoiseach is familiar with this part of the capital, with this historic quarter.

He has rightly described it as the laneways of history. The Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, Deputy Deenihan, has on his desk the plans of the developer, Chartered Land, to encroach on 60% of the national monument, 14-17 Moore Street, and to demolish the battlefield site and most of the lanes of history. Will the Taoiseach ask the Minister, Deputy Deenihan, to refuse to sign approval for Chartered Land's plans given that the company is now presenting modified plans that are subject to approval of a planning application which has not yet been submitted by Chartered Land? Is the Taoiseach aware that if ministerial approval is given at this stage, there is no guarantee that any such modifications will be made or that revised planning applications will be submitted subsequently and that this site, which has been grossly underdeveloped, will be lost forever?

The Taoiseach

We have discussed this matter in the past. Obviously everybody would like us to have appropriate centenary celebrations in 2016. A number of features in our capital city need to be attended to, including the military archives in Cathal Brugha Barracks, the courthouse in Kilmainham Gaol, the GPO itself and, as the Deputy mentioned, 14-17 Moore Street, which I have referred to as the lanes of history, right up as far as the Rotunda, or the site of the actual surrender on the pavement a short distance away from that.

The plans for the development of Moore Street were submitted prior to the construction crash. As has been pointed out on a number of occasions, this has actually allowed some more time for reflection on the best approach in this case. The Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht is very interested in the matter as a citizen, never mind as a Minister. He is chairing the committee dealing with the appropriateness of the centenary celebrations. I know that a number of serious elements are involved in this. The Deputy can take my word for it that we are interested in seeing that Dublin, which was the centre of the 1916 Rising, would have a number of features decided upon to allow us to be in a position to commemorate those events appropriately in 2016.

I recently viewed a video of plans for Moore Street and the surrounding area and there are a number of elements attached to this, including Dublin City Council, the Minister, NAMA, developers, owners and so on. I am quite happy to work with the parties through the Minister and his committee to see that we do the right thing in the interests of having an appropriate centenary celebration in 2016. In the past I have had to advise people from abroad that the site of 14-17 Moore Street is not at the moment what one would expect if one were to go to look at the location where the first fledgling steps towards economic and political independence were taken. It is not the kind of place to which we can send people with pride at the moment. I hope we can deal with that in a sensitive, understanding and comprehensive fashion in the time ahead.

Deputy Gerry Adams

The sites the Taoiseach mentioned, such as the GPO or the military archives, are not under any threat. He knows his history as well as I do. When the British had an empire, brave men and women went out and proclaimed a republic. After days of fighting, they withdrew from the GPO and made their way into Moore Street. I cannot think of anywhere else in the world, whatever the complexion of the politics, where there would be such an iconic site in the state it is in at present. I believe it is evidence of the state we are in and is more evidence of the counter-revolution which followed 1916 than the actual revolution which was bravely proclaimed in the Proclamation.

I have met the relatives of the 1916 leaders, as I am sure has the Taoiseach. I met them as recently as last Thursday and I share their concerns. I have seen the very slick video produced by a developer who wants to produce a huge shopping mall in the capital city, which we do not need. The battlefield site would be destroyed as part of that. I would like the Taoiseach to use an Ulster expression and just say "No" to the developer. The site should be developed properly as an iconic 1916 revolutionary quarter of which we can be proud and in which the world would be interested.

Do I deduce from the Taoiseach's remarks that he will allow the commemorative committee the chance to discuss the Minister's proposals before he submits them to the Cabinet? If that is the case, it would be very positive. Two years ago the Taoiseach promised to meet the Save 16 Moore Street committee and to meet the relatives of the signatories group. I know he has been very busy but I cannot imagine the Taoiseach would not meet the families of Connolly, Pearse, MacDonagh, MacDermott and so on out of respect for what their loved ones who were executed at that time sacrificed for the people of this island. The Taoiseach should say "No" to the developer and say "Yes" to a battlefield site, say "Yes" to the commemorative committee looking into the Minister's proposals, and say "Yes" to a meeting with the relatives he promised two years ago.

The Taoiseach

I have no objection to meeting individual groups. It is a question of availability and time. Clearly the relatives of the 1916 personnel have a particular allegiance, understanding and tradition.

Deputy Gerry Adams

As we all have.

The Taoiseach

That is not an issue. When Deputy Adams asks me whether I am prepared to meet these people, the answer is "Yes", of course.

This is not an individual solo run by a Kerry man, although they are well able to do that. The Minister is charged with chairing the committee dealing with appropriate centenary celebrations and commemorations. In that sense, I believe the majority of Members of the House would like to see that this is done in the best way possible for the capital city of our country. I know the archives are not under threat, nor are Kilmainham Gaol, the courthouse or the GPO. However, they are part of all of that tradition. Would it not be wonderful if we could make arrangements both in terms of the availability of capital to do it and also the question of Moore Street and that locality? I have been down there on many occasions and viewed the location where the O'Rahilly was assassinated. There is considerable tourism potential for people from all over the world to come to a country which was one of the first small nations to achieve its independence in the early part of the previous century. This is an issue that concerns us all. I am quite sure the Minister, Deputy Deenihan, would be very happy to discuss his proposals - as should be so - even in here or certainly at a committee. I spoke to him about the matter last week because of the need to make preparations to see what we can do best for that period. I thank the Deputy for his question.

Deputy Mattie McGrath

Will the Taoiseach still be in government?

The Taoiseach

I want him to understand it is a matter of interest for everybody. We can report progress to the House as needs be.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

The Bill for the Government's so-called property tax - in reality the home tax it plans to inflict on hundreds of thousands of ordinary struggling householders - is having its final Stages rammed through this House with yet another guillotine this evening. Just as the Government imposed a guillotine in the debate before Christmas, it is doing so again to foreclose proper debate and scrutiny of a Bill that will affect the lives of hundreds of thousands of families. The Government that promised us a democratic revolution is cynically shredding and manipulating the democracy of this House and this country to impose the diktats of the troika.

Is this lack of proper debate and scrutiny of the property tax a deliberate attempt on the part of Government to hide some of the most obnoxious features of this Bill, one of which I do not believe most people are yet aware of? Section 1 provides that the value of lands and gardens over and above one acre will not be liable to the property charge, which is incredible. This means the sprawling estates and large gardens, which would significantly boost the value of properties owned by multi millionaires-----

Deputy Mattie McGrath

Where is Deputy Bannon?

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

-----will not be assessed for the purpose of the property tax while the small garden or back yard of a semi-detached house, owned by an ordinary citizen-----

Deputy Emmet Stagg

Or in gated communities.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

-----will be liable for the purposes of the property tax. Is this not proof that yet again, when it comes to the property tax, the super-wealthy are being protected-----

Deputy Mattie McGrath

Landed gentry.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

-----and the burden of this crippling austerity measure will be imposed on ordinary low and middle income families who are struggling to pay their bills? How can the Taoiseach justify this?

Deputy Finian McGrath

Hear, hear.

Deputy Mattie McGrath

Landed gentry.

The Taoiseach

This is not a land tax.

Deputy Finian McGrath

It is a home tax.

The Taoiseach

Deputy Boyd Barrett was not a Member of the House at the time the land tax was being proposed.

Deputy Willie O'Dea

This is an immoral home tax.

The Taoiseach

This is a property tax. It is a self-determining valuation system.

Deputy Willie O'Dea

It is immoral.

Deputy Mattie McGrath

The Taoiseach said previously it was immoral.

The Taoiseach

If Deputy Boyd Barrett believes a bit of ground around a house is a sprawling estate, he needs to move out of his constituency and take a look at the country. The Deputy should travel the country. I think, although I am not too sure, I saw some of Deputy Boyd Barrett's supporters in Letterkenny yesterday. They were making a loud cacophony of noise about property and other issues.

Deputy Finian McGrath

They were supporters of Deputy Pringle.

The Taoiseach

In any event, this is a property tax based on the value of the house. The valuation is set by the owner of the House who is liable for the property tax.

Deputy Mattie McGrath

What about front gardens?

The Taoiseach

The Revenue Commissioners will set out its communications process next week in the initial correspondence to those deemed to be the owners of the properties. Approximately 65% of the revenue derived from the property tax, which will be on a half-yearly basis this year, will be retained by local authorities for the provision of services to people in their respective areas.

Deputy Joan Collins

It has been spent already.

The Taoiseach

I hope I have answered Deputy Boyd Barrett's question. It is not a land tax, it is a property tax based on the house, the valuation of which is determined by the owner.

Deputy Joan Collins

My back garden will be taken into account.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

We need sufficient time for proper scrutiny of amendments and the Bill.

Deputy Emmet Stagg

The Government offered two additional hours last Friday but the Opposition did not take it.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

The Taoiseach has glossed over an important fact. The Government could easily have amended the legislation to provide that agricultural land being worked on for commercial purposes would be treated in a different manner. The effect of the Bill as drafted is that the value of sprawling estates owned by the super-wealthy in this country, and not used for agricultural purposes, will not be taken into account for the purposes of assessment of liability of the property tax while the small garden, back yard or, as mentioned by the Taoiseach, bit of ground owned by ordinary citizens will be. This means ordinary low and middle income people, whether in the city or countryside, will be hammered with this tax-----

An Ceann Comhairle

Can we have a supplementary question please?

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

-----while sprawling estates of 100 acres, owned by the super-wealthy-----

Deputy Mattie McGrath

What about stables?

An Ceann Comhairle

What is the Deputy's question?

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

-----will not be assessed for the purposes of this property tax, proving yet again that this Government is protecting the rich.

An Ceann Comhairle

What is the Deputy's question?

Deputy Simon Harris

He wants a land tax introduced.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Is it not the case that the reason the Government wants to ram through this Bill, and why it imposed guillotines on the debate on it before and after Christmas is that it does not want people to know the truth, namely, that it is protecting its multi-millionaire friends and the super-wealthy and yet again imposing the burden on families that have already been battered with austerity measures?

Deputy Mattie McGrath

Hear, hear.

(Interruptions).

The Taoiseach

I am interested in hearing where the Deputy got his information about big gardens and sprawling estates.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Section 1 of the Bill. The Taoiseach should read the legislation.

The Taoiseach

The Deputy must have heard about them through his private school education.

Deputy Joan Collins

How dare you.

Deputy Mattie McGrath

Where did the Taoiseach go to school?

The Taoiseach

The Deputy spoke about gardens being used for commercial purposes. I do not know if he has a garden where he plants a few cabbages or potatoes for sale at the local market on Saturday mornings.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

The Taoiseach should not be glib about this.

The Taoiseach

However, the Deputy is entitled, given Ireland is a country in which there is plenty of land, to have the space to stand outside his house and look back at it to see if it has been painted properly.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I am speaking of land which is over one acre.

The Taoiseach

What is being introduced is a property tax on the house. If the Deputy is proposing a tax on every square centimetre of land in the county, it is not appropriate to do so now.

Deputy Mattie McGrath

When the Taoiseach next stands outside houses, he will be looking for votes rather than looking at paint.

An Ceann Comhairle

Quiet, please.

The Taoiseach

This is a house property tax, the valuation of which is determined by the owner in accordance with estimates submitted by the Revenue Commissioners based on localities.

Deputy John Halligan

It does not include the land.

(Interruptions).

An Ceann Comhairle

Settle down and listen to the Taoiseach's reply, please.

The Taoiseach

This is not a case of confining everybody to the four walls of the house, as Deputy Mattie McGrath knows-----

Deputy John Halligan

The land must be included when valuing the house.

The Taoiseach

-----rather it is a case of allowing a small space around a house, where appropriate. The valuation is on the house as determined by the owner. This is a house property tax, not a land tax. I hope the Deputy understands.