JOINT COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND THE PUBLIC SERVICE debate -
Wednesday, 14 Jun 2006

Business of Joint Committee.

Chairman

The first item of the agenda is if the minutes of the meeting on 7 June are approved? The minutes are approved.

No. 3 is a travel proposal. The annual meeting of the budgetary committee of national parliaments organised in the European Parliament committee on budgets will take place on 21 June in the European Parliament in Brussels. I propose that the joint committee, in the interest of informing itself in pursuance of its terms of reference, agree to accept the invitation received to participate in the annual meeting of budgetary committees of national Parliaments, organised by the European Parliament's committee on budgets, which will take place on 21 June in Brussels. The estimated cost of attendance is €894.50 per member and €864.50 for an official. It is proposed to send one member and one official. Is that agreed? Agreed. Deputy Ned O'Keeffe has indicated that he is interested in attending.

I propose that the joint committee, in the interest of informing itself in pursuance of its terms of reference, agree to accept the invitation received to participate in the joint meeting of the European Parliament's Committee on Budgetary Control with corresponding committees from other national Parliaments, which will take place on 9 and 10 October 2006. The estimated cost of attendance is €1,159 per member and €1,129 for an official. It is proposed to send one member and one official. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The schedule has been circulated to members. Item 417 is a letter to the Chairman from the clerk to the Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources regarding a report launch. It is noted.

Item 418 is an e-mail from Deputy Timmins regarding dynamic currency conversion. We have already issued a letter to the Irish Bankers Federation and the Financial Regulator on this matter.

Item 419 is a letter to the Chairman from the Minister for Finance regarding the important meeting on 21 June 2006. Deputies Ó Caoláin and Burton had requested this meeting specifically to deal with the plan to decentralise FÁS.

A letter was received from the Minister some days ago and members can read it. A similar letter was received from the Minister——

Deputy Burton

I find these letters extraordinarily discourteous to this committee. We have been given a job by the Oireachtas to ensure some accountability pertaining to matters concerning the Department of Finance, including FÁS. I understand that the day after the Labour Court reached the agreement with the workers, the documents on the purchase of the FÁS headquarters in Birr were signed although it was very clear from the public press that the staff had been guaranteed that they would not have to move to Tullamore. They did not propose to move to Tullamore. We are now about to duplicate FÁS headquarters, in Dublin and Tullamore, at an unknown cost to the taxpayer.

The ministerial replies, no more than the presentation and assertions the Minister for Finance has just made, are discourteous in the extreme. The Minister was like a grouch today. He comes to the Dáil approximately every two months to answer questions and attends this committee maybe twice per year. He was in bad humour and did not give us any reasonable answers.

Deputy Finneran

He was to make a statement and was interrupted.

Senator White

The Deputy is shaming us.

Deputy Burton

The letters in question are in the same vein. We made legitimate requests to meet and the reply of the Minister of State, Deputy Parlon, in particular is an insult to the committee.

Senator White

The Deputy is right on that.

Deputy Burton

It just shows that the Government is back to its old tricks.

Chairman

Only one issue arises from the letters. The director general of FÁS states in his letter that the process of engagement is to conclude not later than two months from the date of the first meeting of the Labour Relations Commission and any unresolved issues at that stage should be referred to the Labour Court for recommendation. Clearly, this committee, as an Oireachtas committee, should not be doing anything to prejudice the industrial relations machinery. These matters are currently before the Labour Relations Commission and Labour Court, as set out in the letter.

The request to FÁS to appear before the committee was an inevitable outcome. However, it is not appropriate when these matters are before the Labour Relations Commission and it is not appropriate to second-guess the outcome of the industrial relations procedures.

Deputy Burton

I disagree. We have learned in respect of the probation and welfare service, which was to be moved to Navan, that the decision thereon was rescinded in favour of a proposal to decentralise other staff in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. On the basis of all the debates we heard on decentralisation, this constitutes a major change of policy. The Labour Court decision——

Chairman

How?

Deputy Burton

It was indicated in the decentralisation proposal of the former Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, that a number of agencies' functions and tasks were to be relocated to 53 separate locations around the country. The probation and welfare service officers who were listed to go to Navan——

Chairman

And Combat Poverty.

Deputy Burton

——were allowed to be delisted. Until then, we had been told there was to be no change. It is of great interest to civil and public servants around the country that the Government has now adopted a more flexible policy. The profound question of whether it is now proposed to move 400 other people from FÁS to Tullamore from elsewhere can be answered regardless of the ongoing industrial relations process. The specialist staff in Dublin have said for the most part that they are not moving under any circumstance. The question still remains to be answered and a question must be asked about the sealing of the contracts to purchase the site in Birr on the day after the Labour Court discussions. The committee is at liberty to ask the Minister about this and receive a briefing and update on the general changes in policy that have now occurred as a consequence of the events of the past few months.

Chairman

The issue the Deputy raised in her letter to this committee arose from the issues concerning FÁS and SIPTU. A similar letter was received from Deputy Ó Caoláin. Deputy Burton is now talking about a property deal. We went specifically down the road she requested. Now she wants to meet about another matter and we will do so at the appropriate time. What the Deputy is now proposing is not what she asked about in her letter to the committee and we were following her letter when we asked the invitees to appear before the committee on this specific issue.

Deputy Bruton

My recollection is that we were discussing this subject in a wider context.

Chairman

The Deputy was very narrow in her focus.

Deputy Bruton

The agreement of the committee on the day in question was to have a more wide-ranging analysis against the aforedescribed background.

The replies are rather self-serving. The dispute is no longer an industrial dispute in that an industrial understanding has now been reached, the details of which are being worked out. If we were to be debarred from inviting any group with industrial relations issues to be worked through, we would never hear from 90% of State companies. I honestly do not accept that these letters are in good faith given the excuse they use.

It is true that the policy is being unwound. For example, the Taoiseach stated in the Dáil yesterday that the Government was no longer to move Departments in their entirety and that elements thereof would be left in Dublin. This is a case of policy being made up on the hoof.

This is the committee with a certain oversight responsibility and it should not accept that it can be just sent packing on such spurious grounds. I agree that we should frame our hearings on a broad basis and consider issues in the round. It is not acceptable that public bodies are telling us they will not come because of industrial relations.

Chairman

I agree with the Deputy that a broader issue should be addressed but the letter from Deputy Burton to this committee was specifically about procedures for promotion.

Deputy Bruton

That was the decision we finally made.

Chairman

It specifically follows from Deputy Burton's letter.

Deputy Burton

My letter was about a specific issue on foot of representatives whom I and other Deputies met here, but it was submitted and added to in the context of the wider issue of decentralisation being discussed. I specifically requested that the points I raised in my letter would be included in the broader discussion. Let us not totally rewrite history.

Chairman

The only issue is that discussions are being facilitated by the Labour Relations Commission, there is a two-month period and if the issues are not resolved, the matter must go to the Labour Court. That is set out in the director general's letter from FÁS which arrived here yesterday evening.

Deputy Bruton

There are frequent users of the Labour Court. If one went to Dublin Bus, it would be in and out of the Labour Court or the Labour Relations Commission every other week.

Senator White

It is a crude letter from FÁS.

Chairman

All I am saying that in the light of the letters we have received from those members who have not attended, there is no point in proceeding with a meeting on decentralisation next Wednesday.

Deputy Burton

I disagree.

Chairman

I understand.

Deputy Burton

If necessary I suggest that the Chairman writes to say we require a discussion because there are ongoing changes on decentralisation policy. Many civil and public servants would very much like to hear some discussion of what these evolving changes, U-turns and so on mean. People are concerned about what is happening to them and their families. Clearly, the Government is making big changes every other day regarding many elements of decentralisation. Civil and public servants deserve the right to learn through the work of this committee what is going on.

Chairman

We agree with that, but that was not the request in Deputy Burton's letter. We can schedule a meeting, but not specifically on these matters.

Deputy Finneran

We should accept the FÁS letter A timeframe was set out in it and we should accept it. There is no reason why this should be dealt with at another time but we should accept the content of the letter. It clearly states that there remain engagements to take place regarding, possibly, the Labour Court. Why should we throw fuel on discussions between people trying to work out their future?

Deputy C. Murphy

Are we talking of postponing the general discussion until——

Chairman

I do not think it wise to have a discussion only on the specifics on the FÁS issue and the industrial relations issue. We should have a broader discussion.

Deputy Bruton

We should find out when the implementation committee is available.

Chairman

We will do that and communicate back. Out of courtesy we must inform SIPTU the meeting is not on because it was expecting to send a delegation next week. I propose that next week, instead of this topic——

Deputy Burton

If SIPTU is still willing to come in, would it be useful to get its view?

Chairman

No. It would be pointless.

Deputy Burton

Why would it be pointless? It represents the workers. It is an important party.

Chairman

It would be a one-sided discussion.

Deputy Burton

The other parties have chosen not to enter the discussion.

Chairman

For a good reason.

Deputy Finneran

Only temporarily.

Chairman

Yes.

Deputy Burton

No, it is to cover the embarrassment of the Minister of State, Deputy Parlon.

Deputy Finneran

We have known the Deputy's approach to decentralisation for a long number of years. Since 2003 we have heard the same approach by the Deputy to the matter.

Deputy Burton

The Minister of State, Deputy Parlon, is not involved in industrial relations negotiations. He is the Minister of State overseeing decentralisation. He should be asked to attend this committee.

Chairman

The Deputy's letter to this committee asked that FÁS and SIPTU be asked to attend, not the Minister of State, Deputy Parlon.

Deputy Burton

My letter was part of an overall general discussion in which we were to get some accountability in regard to what is happening with decentralisation.

Chairman

We will do that and will schedule a meeting.

Deputy C. Murphy

Is there a meeting next week?

Chairman

In case it skipped people's attention, the Dáil yesterday evening referred two motions to this committee on Ireland's contribution to the International Development Association and the 14th replenishment. As we have to deal with those motions by 28 June, we must deal with them next week at the meeting of the select committee.

Deputy Burton

With regard to those two motions, would it be possible to ask the Department of Finance to provide some details with regard to how the bodies propose to spend the allocated money, the timeline and timeframe for the spending of the money, along with the projects and headings under which the moneys will be spent? Could we get all that in advance of the meeting rather than on the day of the meeting?

Chairman

We will request this information to be provided in writing. The select committee will meet next Wednesday.

The joint committee adjourned at 2.45 p.m. sine die.