I am sure that Senators are, by now, quite well aware of the general provisions of this Bill.
Any adjustment in the remuneration of parliamentarians inevitably gives rise to a great deal of critical comment, much of which, as we have seen over the past week, can be confused and misleading.
The simple fact is that Senators, Dáil Deputies, parliamentary office holders and members of the Judiciary have not received any increase in their remuneration for almost two and a half years — since June 1981. This position has arisen notwithstanding that the Review Body on Higher Remuneration in the Public Sector in their report of 30 October 1979 clearly indicated that the levels of remuneration which they recommended, and which the Government at the time accepted, should in the future attract all standard national agreements or other general round increases.
The provisions of the 1981 Public Service Pay Agreement, as amended, which provided for three phased increases of 2 per cent, 6 per cent and 5 per cent have been applied to all the groups dealt with by the review body with the exception only of parliamentarians and the Judiciary.
Since 1 September last, the first phase of the 1983 public service pay agreement has also been payable in the public service involving a further increase of 4.75 per cent.
It is, I believe, unfair and undesirable that parliamentarians or the Judiciary should, for no good reason, be excluded from the benefit of national or Public Service pay agreements which apply to all other categories of public servants. Failure to implement their provisions can only give rise to greater problems in the future when steps have to be taken to correct the neglect of past years. The Bill, therefore, provides that the increases under the 1981 Public Service pay agreement — 2 per cent, 6 per cent and 5 per cent — and the first phase of the 1983 public service pay agreement, 4.75 per cent, will be applied as from 1 September 1983, but without retrospection, to parliamentarians and to the annual sums payable to leaders of certain parties in Dáil Éireann. The full provisions as from the due dates, that is with retrospection, will be implemented in respect of the Judiciary. The Bill also provides that in the future general pay rounds applied to the Civil Service will also automatically apply to Oireachtas Members and to the Judiciary with effect from the appropriate dates. In this way the recommendation of the review body will, in the future, be adhered to.
I do not think that there is any good reason for depriving the Judiciary of the retrospective elements of these increases and for thus treating them less favourably than the rest of the public service. Accordingly, the Bill provides that the increases under the 1981 Public Service Pay Agreement and the first phase of the 1983 agreement will be applied in their case with retrospection to the due dates, that is, 2 per cent from 1 December 1981, 6 per cent from 1 March 1982, 5 per cent from 1 October 1982, together with 4.75 per cent from 1 September 1983.
In the case of the parliamentarians, however, the Government have decided that the 1981 agreement increases will apply from 1 September 1983 and without retrospection. As a result of this, TDs who served since the 1981 agreement came into effect will be at a permanent loss of £2,320 approximately which is the amount by which their remuneration fell short during the period up to 31 August 1983 and Senators will be at a corresponding loss of £1,450. A Senator currently in receipt of £7,619 per annum since June 1981 — if retrospection had been allowed — would have moved on 1 December 1981 to £7,828, on 1 March 1982 to £8,298 and on 1 January 1983 to £8,713 — this last phase to have actually been paid in January of this year, rather than October 1982, in accordance with the amendments to the 1981 agreement.
In the light of the prevailing economic climate I believe that Members of the Seanad will appreciate the reasons which compelled the Government to decide against payment of retrospection for parliamentarians.
These increases merely apply to parliamentarians, without the benefit of retrospection, a number of public service pay agreement phases which have applied from the due dates to public servants generally. Adjustments of this order have also been granted in the private sector. The 19 per cent increase so widely commented on in recent days is no more than the aggregate of these phases which have been enjoyed for up to two years by all other groups but which have been withheld until now from parliamentarians.
The opportunity is being taken in the legislation to amend the manner in which the terms of general round increases — such as those under the public service pay agreements — are applied to Members of the Oireachtas and the Judiciary in the future. Up to now a cumbersome procedure has resulted in a situation where many months could — and often did — elapse between the decision to implement a pay round and its actual payment. Firstly, there is required a Government decision, followed by the making of a Statutory Order which, in turn, must be laid before the Dáil for 21 sitting days before taking effect. Should a recess intervene, or if the decision to initiate the procedure takes place during a recess, the process is even longer. It will be obvious, therefore, that without delay on the part of Government, a considerable time may elapse before an ordinary phase, payable to all others, is actually paid to the Members of the Legislature.
In the past this process has resulted in a situation where a single increase has been reported or commented upon on a number of different occasions, giving the impression that there had, in fact, been a series of increases actually paid during the period. In the future, therefore, and commencing with the enacting of this legislation and the current public service pay agreement, increases applying generally to the Civil Service will be applied automatically to Members of the Oireachtas, to the annual sums payable to certain party leaders, and to the Judiciary, with effect from the due date in each case.
In relation to any other changes in parliamentary remuneration, arising, for example, as a result of a review body inquiry, provision is being made so that, in future, an order having immediate effect could be made either increasing or decreasing such remuneration and such an order would be capable of being annulled by resolution of the Dáil within 21 sitting days but without prejudice to anything already done thereunder.
In the case of the Judiciary, orders increasing remuneration will simply be presented to both Houses but would not, for constitutional reasons, be capable of annulment.
When a Seanad general election is called, as the House is probably aware, Senators continue to be paid their allowance until the day before polling day. Accordingly, a Senator who is re-elected continues to receive payment of the allowance without a break. A Dáil Deputy, however, ceases to qualify for allowance as from the date of dissolution of the Dáil — recent dissolutions have lasted for approximately three weeks — and qualification for resumption of payment does not occur until, and unless, the Deputy is re-elected to the subsequent Dáil. This has caused a serious loss of income to Deputies in recent years because of the holding of three general elections in a relatively short period of time.
The Review Body on Higher Remuneration in the Public Sector commented on this matter at paragraph 12.18 of the October 1979 report and said they felt that consideration should be given to the question of continuing payment of TDs' allowances up to the date before polling day for the new Dáil. The Government have decided that a sum equivalent to one-eighteenth of annual allowance shall be payable to a Deputy on dissolution of a Dáil. Arrangements will also be made to include the period of dissolution as reckonable for pension purposes.
Certain other changes, basically of a minor nature, are being brought into effect under the Bill. These include provision to allow changes to be made to the Members' pension scheme by ministerial amending scheme, provision that the posts of Cathaoirleach and Leas-Chathaoirleach of the Seanad be made pensionable, provision for amending the conditions for regarding the post of Attorney-General as pensionable and provision for removal of an anomaly in the pension terms of certain former Parliamentary Secretaries, which unintentionally resulted from the pension provisions for Ministers of State in the Oireachtas (Allowances to Members) and Ministerial, Parliamentary and Judicial Offices (Amendment) Act, 1977. I will be happy to explain these changes more fully on Committee Stage, where necessary.
It is my intention to introduce, by way of amending scheme under the new procedure, an optional situation whereby a defeated or retiring Member of the Oireachtas who has served the requisite eight qualifying years may decide to draw pension on the basis of one-fortieth for each year of service as at present, or, alternatively, to choose a lump sum, calculated actuarially, together with reduced pension payments based on three-one hundred and sixtieths for each year of service.
I also intend modifying the pension scheme to allow those with short service, who are not qualified for pension, to have their own pension contributions refunded to them as happens in most other pension schemes. This matter was referred to by the review body at paragraph 12.13 of their 1979 Report.
The review body, in dealing with superannuation matters, stated at paragraph 12.20 that they were taking the 6 per cent contribution payable by Members into account in considering the appropriate level of allowance and went on to say that if changes were to be made in relation to the refund of contributions where Members fail to qualify for pensions, severance grants for Deputies and the continuance of TDs' allowances beyond the date of dissolution of a Dail, these would have to be part of an overall package and improvements in benefits on these lines would require modifications elsewhere in existing arrangements.
As already stated, two of these matters are being dealt with, and it is my intention that these changes, and Members' conditions generally, will be considered by the review body when next a general review similar to that reported on in 1979 takes place. In relation to the question of severance grants the Government have decided against the introduction of such payments.
While they do not form part of the specific provisions of this Bill, nevertheless I think I should tell the House that it is also the intention of the Government, in conjunction with the passing of the Bill, to update Members' travelling, overnight and day allowances. These rates have not been increased since January 1980 and have clearly fallen out of line. For the future, Members who qualify will be paid the same mileage rates as are, for the time being, allowed to civil servants.
The present overnight allowance of £17.50 for those Members who are obliged to stay in Dublin while the Houses are in session is to be revised to £27.50. This applies where the Member resides more than 20 miles from the GPO and stays overnight in Dublin. The day allowance, payable to those Members who reside within ten miles of the House, is increasing from £10 to £16. Mileage allowance is not, may I remind the House, payable to these Members.
It should be pointed out that this was the level of increase which was deemed to be appropriate nearly a year ago. It is intended that, in the future, these figures will be adjusted by reference to Civil Service mileage and subsistence rates.
While on the subject of expenses, I would like to refer to what I consider to have been less than responsible coverage of this aspect in certain sections of the media. These have suggested that payments for expenses in some way constitute additional remuneration. Nothing could be further from the truth. The rates payable to Members of the Oireachtas are designed to recoup out-of-pocket expenses. It would surely be unreasonable to suggest that Members could carry out their duties as public representatives, such as travelling to Dublin for meetings of the Oireachtas, without incurring out-of-pocket expenses on travelling and accommodation. The overnight allowance payable is far from generous when compared to similar rates paid to many others, in both the public and private sectors, whose duties involve them in being away from home for protracted periods.
All that the main provisions of the Bill set out to do is to restore Members and the Judiciary to the level which the review body recommended they should be at, and maintained at, through application of wage agreements. This is being done by granting the terms of the 1981 Public Service pay agreement and the first phase of the 1983 agreement. In the case of parliamentarians the adjustment will take effect only from September last. This restores Members' remuneration to the level recommended by the review body but without retrospection. In the case of Seanad membership this results in a permanent loss of some £1,450 in retrospection vis-à-vis comparable Public Service income earners.
As I stated in Dáil Éireann there is an obligation upon those of us entrusted with the operation of a democracy to ensure that the democratic system is able to work. If we should see fit to shirk from providing for what we know is a fair, just and reasonable payment to any Member doing his or her job, and to single out parliamentarians alone as the group who should not be allowed increases applicable to the rest of society, and whose application to parliamentarians has been recommended by an independent review body, then we are doing both Parliament and democracy itself a disservice. I commend the Bill to the House.
