Joe Higgins
Question:5. Deputy Joe Higgins asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will report on the implementation of the Haddington Road agreement. [16812/14]
View answerHaddington Road Agreement Review
Questions (5)
Oral answers (6 contributions)
I ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform to report on the implementation of the Haddington Road agreement and outline the real effects of that agreement.
As the House will be aware, the measures negotiated under the Haddington Road agreement will deliver a further reduction of €1 billion in the public service pay and pensions bill by 2016. The focus of public service management is now firmly on the delivery of the required level of savings and there has been significant progress in the implementation of the agreement at various levels.
The Cabinet Committee on Public Service Reform, chaired by the Taoiseach, meets regularly to review, among other public service reform issues, progress on the implementation of the Haddington Road agreement. In addition, officials in my Department represent public service management on the agreement's oversight group, which is charged with addressing issues of implementation and interpretation under the agreement as they arise.
In terms of cost reduction, almost €300 million in savings, arising from the implementation of various measures under the agreement, was incorporated into the various Votes in the context of the Revised Estimates for last year. The measures and reforms implemented helped to ensure that spending remained in line with profile and resulted in Ireland delivering on our fiscal targets for last year, enabling us to exit the troika programme.
Furthermore, the full-year impact of the measures implemented in 2013 has been incorporated into the respective Votes for 2014. In addition, a number of other measures which will deliver additional savings this year and beyond, such as the deferral of increment progression, have also been incorporated into all Votes as appropriate.
The effects of the Haddington Road agreement are now becoming obvious in the form of a deterioration of public services from the point of view of ordinary people and are destructive of public services. The recent Prime Time exposé of a crisis in the ambulance service shows that it is not possible to take thousands of workers from public services, including the health service, and still expect to have a comprehensive service for our people.
Does the Minister agree that trade unions now rue the collective agreements in the local authority sector under the Haddington Road agreement given that the Government is now taking hundreds of long-term unemployed people and will compel them into forced labour with local authorities through the gateway scheme, working 19.5 hours for €20 a week? They will earn €1.03 an hour doing crucial work, such as village enhancement schemes, landscaping, control of animals, libraries, which should be done by people with full-time properly paid jobs with decent conditions. Instead the Government is forcing people, who are unfortunate to be long-term unemployed because no real jobs are being created, into this type of forced labour.
The Deputy asked about the effects of the Haddington Road agreement. Without the Haddington Road agreement we could not have had a budget that would have been acceptable and passed by this House last year. I do not believe we would have exited the bailout and there would be a crisis in the country.
That is why before the end of 2012 I opened the books to the trade unions. As a good employer I outlined the circumstances and options. I asked all public sector trade unions to engage with me and they did. It was a very difficult and stressful process for all concerned because we are asking people, who had already made a contribution in our national recovery and who rightly did not feel any responsibility for the calamity that befell the Exchequer, to make a further contribution. However, without exception every trade union did. I do not believe that they rue anything because every citizen, especially every public servant, has a real stake in the country's recovery.
The Deputy spoke about unemployment. When the Government came to office three years ago there was a real fear, in some cases an expectation, that unemployment would exceed 500,000 and social disintegration would follow.
Unemployment has been falling for the past 18 months. The number of unemployed stands at 390,000 and IBEC expects the figure to decline to below 11% this year. I hope this expectation is realised. It was the actions of the government, all of them difficult and resisted by the Deputy, that led us to the better path of recovery, which will rebound to the benefit of every public servant and citizen.
The Minister raises fundamental issues when he states that without the Haddington Road agreement, we would not have had a budget. His argument is based on the acceptance of the troika programme of compelling Irish people to assume tens of billions of euro in debt that did not belong to them. The Government could have broken this cycle but decided instead to continue to sacrifice nurses, local authority workers and others on the altar of the financial markets. Does the Minister agree that this is the position?
Does the Minister also agree that the programme of austerity has seriously undermined employment creation and that it is by reinvestment, particularly major public investment, rather than repaying bondholders that the unemployment crisis will be resolved? It is shameful that he is party to a scheme that forces people who are unfortunate enough to be long-term unemployed off the dole and onto forced labour schemes.
The Deputy's comments bring us to the heart of the matter. His basic thesis is that we should have reneged on the solemn commitments made by the previous Dáil, which I voted against, in respect of our requirements. What would have been the consequences if the Government had decided not to pay the debts in question? We would have defaulted and would not have had funding for public services, as the troika was the only funder available to us until the end of last year. Our public services would have collapsed as a result. This prospect may have suited the thesis of those who believe anarchy is the way to a new society. However, those of us who want to have decent public services and standards of living, as opposed to a collapse into anarchy, cannot afford to live in a fantasy world in which the nation can default without consequences. Most ordinary people fully understand that is fantasy land.
Public Sector Reform Implementation
Questions (6)
Bernard Durkan
Question:6. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the extent to which specific reform proposals continue to deliver positively for the Exchequer in line with expectations and targets; if any revision or amendment is necessary; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16728/14]
View answerOral answers (6 contributions)
This question relates to the extent to which budgetary projections remain on target. Based on the performance of the past three years, does the Minister believe we will achieve the targets set?
The Government continues to make good progress in achieving its deficit targets and priorities. Since its peak in 2009, gross voted expenditure has been reduced by €10.1 billion, or 16%, from €63.1 billion in 2009 to just under €53 billion in 2014. Staff numbers have been reduced by more than 30,000 since the 2008 peak, even as demands on services increased.
In the context of bringing public expenditure back onto a sustainable path, meaningful reform of the public sector was essential to ensure we could maintain and improve services. In November 2011, we set out our programme of reforms in our first public service reform plan. In January this year, I published a report setting out the progress made under the first plan and published the Government's second public service reform plan, setting out our ambition for the next three years.
As well as enabling services to be maintained in the context of reduced resources and improving services, a number of reforms will continue to deliver cost savings. I will cite a number of examples. The Croke Park agreement delivered €1.8 billion in pay and non-pay savings. The Haddington Road agreement sets out a number of measures to deliver further savings of €1 billion by 2016. We have undertaken a major review of public procurement and are implementing a radical overhaul of our approach, with the new office of public procurement targeting €500 million in savings in the next three years, of which €127 million will be achieved this year.
We are also introducing shared services for a range of back office functions to increase efficiency and integration across public sector organisations. For example, PeoplePoint, the Civil Service human resources and pensions shared service centre, will deliver savings estimated at €12.5 million annually. The use of innovative models of service delivery, greater use of technology and more efficient management of the State's property portfolio will also yield savings. Some of the savings made will be reinvested in front-line services in what I describe as a reform dividend. Public service reform will continue to be an important element of the Government's strategy for economic recovery.
I thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply. Will it be possible, in preparing for the 2015 budget, to weigh up the arguments for reform versus expenditure cuts, with a view to determining which option will be more appropriate as the economic recovery unfolds?
The Deputy asked a good question, which goes to the heart of the creation of my Department. In advance of entering government, the Deputy's party and my party had both reached the conclusion that to make the economic changes required, we needed to have a proactive reform agenda. This could only be driven by a Cabinet Minister who controlled the money, and the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform was established to that end. The Government set out a radical reform agenda, which has been embraced by the public sector. As I set out in the report I made to the Oireachtas in January, we have achieved more progress on reforming the public service in the past three years than had been made in the previous 30 years.
Reform is not a process that is required by a crisis. It should be a permanent feature of government. We should constantly re-examine how we deliver services and whether we can do so in a more proactive manner. One of the most important reforms is reform of the budget. I hope that in calmer times, when we are in an expansion rather than a retrenchment phase, Oireachtas committees will examine options, line by line and in advance of budgets, make recommendations to the Government and be truly part of the budgetary process.
I congratulate the Minister on the performance of his Department, which has made extraordinary achievements, given the position we were in when the Government was formed. When the Government is considering future options, will it be possible to introduce guidelines on the long-term performance of the economy with a view to ensuring we do not revisit the circumstances we experienced a few years ago?
The Deputy is well versed in developments in the European context in the past three years. Ireland has signed up to the Stability and Growth Pact, which has become part of the constitutional architecture of the State. Eurozone countries have mutual oversight of their budgets to ensure the common currency is protected and countries such as Germany, Greece, France and Italy do not engage in profligacy that will have an impact on us and our capacity. Similarly, other eurozone countries have oversight of our budget in a new set of mechanisms known as the six-pack and two-pack. These will ensure the disastrous mistakes that led Ireland to the brink of economic collapse will not be repeated. The Oireachtas must take these developments to heart by allowing much more transparency in the way in which the budgetary process and cycle evolve. We must break the tendency of Governments to spend money in the run-up to general elections and act in a more parsimonious manner immediately thereafter. Real analysis of public expenditure is needed to put taxpayers in the picture.
Public Expenditure Data
Questions (7)
Bernard Durkan
Question:7. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the extent to which budgetary projections in respect of public expenditure continue to remain on target and in line with expectations; if any specific areas have exceeded expectations or fallen behind; the implications in the event of any such movement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16727/14]
View answerOral answers (7 contributions)
Question No. 7 is also in the name of Deputy Durkan. I suggest he buy a lottery ticket.
This question is similar to my previous question. I seek information on the performance of individual Departments or their subsidiaries, with particular reference to the need to keep in mind that some Departments are demand- or consumer-driven.
To what extent does the Minister envisage those Departments being able to cope within budget at the moment and in the future?
The Deputy asked a very profound question. Gross voted expenditure has been reduced from its peak of €63.1 billion in 2009 to just under €53 billion in 2014. This represents a reduction of 16% between 2009 and 2014 and will help us meet our general Government deficit target of 4.8%, which is still very large, for 2014. The radical improvement in the sustainability of the public finances has helped to achieve our exit from the EU-IMF programme of financial assistance.
Managing the delivery of public services within agreed budgetary allocations is a key responsibility of each Minister and Department and several measures are in place to help ensure that these set targets continue to be met. My Department is in regular communication with all Departments and offices to ensure that expenditure is being managed within agreed allocations and we monitor their draw down of funds from the Exchequer on a monthly basis. Where necessary, my Department also meets line Departments to review financial and budgetary management. I report to Government regularly on spending trends and we publish information each month as part of the Exchequer statement.
The end of December Exchequer returns outlined that voted expenditure was well within budget for 2013. Overall net voted expenditure of €43.1 billion was €300 million or 0.7% below the budget profile for 2013. This represented a decrease of almost €1.9 billion or 4.2% when compared to 2012 so the trajectory is being well managed. Any overruns in any individual Department that is demand-led is more than compensated by savings we can allocate that Department from other Departments. These figures demonstrate the ongoing effective management of expenditure to ensure that Government can achieve its fiscal objectives while meeting increased demands for delivery of good quality public services for citizens is under way.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
This effective management and delivery of savings is continuing in 2014 with the latest data on expenditure to end-March 2014 indicating that overall net voted expenditure was €261 million or 2.5% behind profile, a year-on-year decrease of €631 million or 5.8%. In gross terms voted expenditure was €164 million or 1.2% behind profile and was €452 million or 5.7% lower than the same period last year. The reduction in expenditure compared with the first quarter in 2013 illustrates that
Departments are working to deliver the savings measures outlined in budget 2014 and that the Government is firmly committed to meeting our deficit targets.
I thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply. To what extent does he see Ireland's performance remaining on target following its exit from the bailout? To what extent will that new scenario impact in a positive or negative way on the Minister's budgetary projections and his ability to achieve similar savings in the future?
Again, the Deputy asks a very good question. There is a view that having gone through such a painful and difficult period of expenditure, we can somehow take our foot off the pedal. Even if we achieve all our targets, and we are determined we will, the fact that our deficit is expected to be of the order of 4.8% this year shows that we are still not out of the woods. We need to get to our agreed target of a deficit below 3% of GDP next year. There are positive signs. The Deputy saw the first quarter figures in terms of taxes which are above profile. This shows a healthy and growing economy, particularly the employment figures. Both employment and employment revenues such as PRSI indicate a recovery. However, we cannot slacken on discipline in terms of ensuring that the profiles we have set out are maintained. I know all my colleagues around the Cabinet table understand that fully and will maintain the discipline that has brought us to the good place we are now in.
Given the Minister's exchange of views with his EU colleagues, how does this country's credibility rating internationally fare? To what extent does he see further improvements in the various agencies in their appraisal of this country arising from the performance to date?
We have made remarkable progress on almost every level in respect of the external overview of this country. Even the most jaundiced of analysts in the rating agencies have a more positive view of Ireland, which has helped us in terms of the bond yields for our ten-year debt. When we came into Government, Ireland was basically rated as junk and we could not sell our bonds. There was no point in putting them out because the interest rate demanded would have been so punitive. The most recent bond sale indicated that we can now sell ten-year bonds at in or around 3% and marginally below that on the secondary market on occasions. This means that people have long-term confidence in our capacity as an economy to pay back those loans and as a result, they are not demanding punitive interest rates.
There is a very positive view of Ireland in the European Commission and the Council of Ministers, which helps in terms of inward investment. The flow of foreign direct investment is very strong and we hope this will continue. We have a transformation in the external perception of Ireland as a country that is determined to recover and build a new economic platform on the basis of goods and services that people want to buy and sell. It is a good place in which to invest.
Regional Development
Questions (8)
Joe Higgins
Question:8. Deputy Joe Higgins asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will report on his meeting with the delegation from the European Parliament's committee on regional development last month. [16814/14]
View answerOral answers (13 contributions)
Could the Minister report on the meeting with a delegation from the European Parliament's committee on regional development?
On 26 March 2014, I met a delegation from the European Parliament's committee on regional development, REGI, to discuss the next round of Structural Funds spending in Ireland. I was accompanied at the meeting by Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes. The REGI committee is a key committee of the European Parliament that is responsible for regional and cohesion policy, including the European regional development fund and other instruments of the
Union's regional policy. It was on a three-day visit to Ireland that included a meeting with the Chair of the Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform and visits to Waterford and Kilkenny where the delegation had an opportunity to see how Structural Funds are being spent on the ground.
During our meeting, I briefed the committee on preparations for the next round of structural funds spending in Ireland. As the Deputy may be aware, Ireland was successful in securing €1.2 billion of cohesion policy funding from the European regional development fund and the European social fund for the period 2014-2020. This represents an increase of 8% in real terms over the 2007-2013 programming period at a time when the overall EU budget for cohesion policy has been reduced by 8%. It includes special allocations for the BMW region and towards a new Northern Ireland PEACE programme.
I discussed with the committee how funding from the European social fund and the European regional development fund will be targeted at combating long-term and youth unemployment and social exclusion, as well as promoting research and development investment, the competitiveness of the business sector and an environmentally-friendly and resource-efficient economy. The funding will complement the Government's jobs and growth agenda.
The committee acknowledged the key role that Ireland had played last year during our Presidency of the Council of Ministers towards brokering an agreement on the package of regulations that will govern the next round of structural funds across Europe. For my part, I thanked the committee for its constructive engagement in the complex and lengthy negotiations and acknowledged the role of the European Parliament in setting the legislative framework for a wide range of key policy areas and in particular for its contribution to the development of cohesion policy for the 2014-2020 round.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
The Minister of State and I also briefed the committee on the progress the Government is making in repairing the economy and returning it to growth. We discussed the contribution Structural Funds can make to that process. The REGI committee appreciates the importance of the European structural and investment funds for a country like Ireland and was keen to hear how we propose to maximise the value of available funding.
Would the Minister agree that it is a tragedy and a shame to see the effect of the economic crisis and the baleful effects of austerity, particularly in regional areas and rural Ireland? This is iconically illustrated by the inability of local GAA clubs and possibly other sports to field teams because young people are forced out through lack of employment. Does the Minister agree that balanced regional development is crucial? What key proposals does he envisage between 2014 and 2020 with regard to the regional funds? What proposals and job creation figures does he envisage coming from that? Mindful of the fact that unemployment is tragically and unacceptably high in Dublin, what are the implications for working-class people who are in difficulty or people who are unemployed there?
The Deputy is touching on a very important point. We are experiencing recovery in this country but it is not a balanced recovery, as the Deputy rightly said.
It is clear that parts of our main cities are doing very well now but other parts are not and rural areas, small rural towns in particular, have yet to feel the real impact of recovery. That is a work in progress. The Government has proposed a number of initiatives and if Deputy Higgins reads the comprehensive nature of the jobs strategy outlined by the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Employment he will see specific balancing initiatives in the package to ensure that every place is impacted upon positively.
We had a comprehensive rural support system through Leader in the past and I wish to have an analogous system to support inner city areas where there are real pockets of inequality and underdevelopment. I hope that can be manifest as well. We want to front-load the funding to deal with the themes we set out during our Presidency - youth unemployment and the youth guarantee - because Deputy Higgins is correct that the most important element is getting people back to work.
I put it to the Minister that the recovery is more apparent than real. Ordinary people do not feel the recovery in their daily lives, in their pockets and in the availability of enough jobs. I put it to the Minister that inner city Dublin needs attention but so too do the suburbs where there is very high unemployment, many problems and a huge housing crisis. A resolution of those problems is required. It is crucial that critical funding is made available. We cannot be convinced by the EU, which has taken so much through forcing the Irish people to take on debts of bondholders and bankers that were not there and then pretending to make up in this particular way.
As a Labour Minister, Deputy Howlin should be concerned by the figures for housing which I read the other day. In the 1970s the State was building between 7,000 and 8,000 local authority houses per year, whereas now the Government is building a few hundred. Could the Minister comment on the matter in terms of the funding that is available?
Neither the European Regional Development Fund, ERDF, nor the Energy Efficiency Finance Facility, EEFF, will fund local authority houses. That is a different issue. We must find the resources to do that. I recommend to the Deputy a very fine document published by the Labour Parliamentary Party last week on the housing crisis. I accept there is an issue in that regard and perhaps we could have common cause in addressing some aspects of it.
I do not accept Deputy Higgins's assertion that the recovery is not real. The recovery is happening. Unemployment is falling. Instead of heading towards the 0.5 million mark, as it was when we came into government, it is falling month on month. I hope the trend will continue. A total of 60,000 additional jobs was created last year. It is said that emigration is impacting on the figure but in fact more people are now at work. There are 1.91 million people at work, which is back to the level it was at in 2009. However, we need to do an awful lot more, which is why the Taoiseach has designated this year as the year of jobs. Getting people back to work is the most important element in providing the feeling of recovery in every household. We must continue to work at that.
In terms of the very valid point Deputy Higgins made, a lot of people have had a lot of money taken out of their pockets. We have increased taxation and people are squeezed in terms of their wage rates, in particular in the public sector. Until we get out of that situation and people have more money in their pocket we will not lift that sense of the impact on families and individuals given the awful period we have come through that has manifested itself in so many Irish households.
The Deputy is not present for Question No. 9.
Question No. 9 replied to with Written Answers.
A Cheann Comhairle, would you consider taking No. 22 with No. 10 as it is essentially the same subject?
I am afraid it is not up to me. That is a matter for the Minister. I do not make those decisions.
Both questions deal with the same subject. Deputy Ó Cuív kindly told me he would not object.
I do not have a problem if the Minister is prepared to do that.
I do not have a problem with that.
Tá sé sin ceart go leor.
Straitéis 20 Bliain don Ghaeilge
Questions (10, 22)
Éamon Ó Cuív
Question:10. D'fhiafraigh Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív den Aire Caiteachais Phoiblí agus Athchóirithe cad iad na pleananna atá aige chun líon na státseirbhíseach atá cumasach lena ngnó a dhéanamh trí Ghaeilge a mhéadú; cén scrúdú atá déanta aige ar an gcur chuige i ndlínsí eile ina bhfuil dhá theanga oifigiúla; agus an ndéanfaidh sé ráiteas ina thaobh. [16616/14]
View answerJoe Higgins
Question:22. Deputy Joe Higgins asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will report on the implementation of the 20 year strategy for the Irish language by his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16816/14]
View answerOral answers (24 contributions)
Mar is eol don Aire, ní féidir seirbhísí trí Ghaeilge a chur ar fáil mura mbeidh daoine ann a bhfuil eolas acu ar an teanga. Tá mo cheist ag iarraidh a fháil amach céard iad na pleananna atá ag an Aire le déanamh cinnte go mbeidh daoine le Gaeilge ann. Freisin, cén staidéar atá déanta ar an gcur chuige i ndlínsí eile ina bhfuil dhá theanga oifigiúla le déanamh cinnte go mbeidh daoine in ann seirbhís a chur ar fáil sa dá theanga oifigiúla sna tíortha sin?
I propose to take Questions Nos. 10 and 22 together.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Teachta as an cheist sin a ardú. As the Deputy is aware, the Government approved the introduction of a new approach to ensure that there is a sufficient number of civil servants who are able to perform their duties through Irish. These new arrangements were put in place in the context of replacing the policy of awarding bonus marks for Irish language proficiency in Civil Service recruitment and promotion competitions which was not meeting the Government's or this House's objective of having bilingualism in the public service.
Under the new approach measures are being introduced to increase the cohort of functional bilinguals in the Civil Service in order to reflect a more competency-based approach to recruitment and, where appropriate, promotion. In future, in the context of workforce planning frameworks, Departments will be required to identify the posts or areas of work requiring functional bilinguals and to include those in their workforce action plans. Having regard to the implementation of the Gaeltacht Act 2012, Departments will be asked to pay particular attention to posts that are located in, or that are serving, Gaeltacht areas. The process will be central to ensuring that future recruitment and interdepartmental promotion competitions run by the Public Appointments Service, PAS, make sufficient provision for appointments to posts requiring functional bilinguals. In the case of departmental recruitment and promotion competitions, an assessment will be made of the requirement for functional bilinguals and, where necessary and appropriate, a sub-panel of functional bilinguals will be put in place.
The new arrangements replace the scheme of bonus marks for Irish, introduced nearly 40 years ago following the abolition of compulsory Irish for entry to the Civil Service. Under the new arrangements, where a post in a Department is identified as requiring proficiency in Irish, the intention is that it should be filled by someone who demonstrably is functionally bilingual.
As a first step, the arrangements will be piloted in the upcoming executive officer, EO, recruitment competition, which it is planned will take place shortly. It is proposed that a sub-panel of Irish language functional bilinguals comprising up to 6% of the overall EO panel size, will be created. The timing of the EO competition is under consideration in the context of an overall approach to recruitment.
My officials have written to Departments notifying them of the new arrangements. Departments have been requested to review the workforce planning frameworks previously submitted and to identify specific posts or areas of work under their remit which require functional bilingualism and to include those in a revised workforce action plan.
In developing this new, innovative and positive approach, my officials took account of the supports and incentives applied in other jurisdictions such as, for example, the Basque Autonomous Community and Canada. The model now being adopted for the Civil Service draws on lessons learned in those jurisdictions and others, as well as our national experience and has the objective of increasing the cohort of functional bilinguals in the Civil Service. It is based on good practice by reflecting a more competency-based approach and assigning responsibility to Departments in identifying posts where functional bilingual skills are required. The new model will be tested on a pilot basis, as described, and revised as necessary in the context of the experience with its implementation. I would very much welcome the input of Members of the House and committees of the House on those matters.
I welcome the idea of identifying the posts but the Minister must accept that functional bilinguals will not necessarily take posts where Irish is a requirement. There is a career path in the Civil Service.
Does the Minister accept that not every functional bilingual will be in a job identified by the Department as requiring such language proficiency? Will he accept that in other jurisdictions there is outside independent verification that the person concerned has the language competency to carry out his or her duties within the specified languages, in this case Irish and English?
The Minister mentioned that a panel of bilinguals comprising up to 6% of the EO panel would be established. Working on the basis of full replacement of staff in the Civil Service, would he accept that approximately 3% of the total number of civil servants are recruited each year? Would he agree that 0.18% of the increase - minus those who leave the service in any given year - would consist of functional bilinguals? Would he accept that currently, approximately 2% of the public service are functional bilinguals? After ten years of this policy, we would be lucky to have 3.5% functional bilinguals in the system. Does the Minister consider 3.5% adequate to provide services for people across a wide range of areas?
The Deputy asked three distinct questions. In regard to his first question, I agree with the Deputy that there will be functional bilinguals who have absolute proficiency in Irish and English working in areas other than the defined posts or geographical areas that would require it and are designated. I hope there will be a much broader spread of people who are proficient to handle any case in either Irish or English. Most people in the public service - that is, anybody who has gone through the Irish education system - will have a reasonable grasp of Irish, but that has been the problem. In the past we had the notion that we would get an extra few marks for being able to perform as Gaeilge on a particular day. We need to move away from that. If we consider what is happening in Canada and in other areas, we need to put in place provision for real proficiency in Irish for people to be able to deal in a comprehensive way with citizens who want to transact all their business as Gaeilge, as is their constitutional right.
I will briefly deal with the Deputy's two other questions. First, independent verification is something that I can look at. Second, I do not agree with the Deputy's mathematical formula. He is right in terms of the 6% figure in that we could pick a number, but let us see how this particular policy works. I am absolutely open to any inputs the Deputy might want to make in regard to it but I think it is an innovation that is worth trying.
I am fascinated with the Minister's statement that he does not agree with my mathematics. As Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, he spends all day, every day working with figures.
That is true.
Allowing that the average period a person spends in the public service is 30 years, the replacement percentage would be approximately 3% if every person leaving was to be replaced, which is not the case at present, and 6% of 3% is 0.18%, but we must allow for the fact that some of the people leaving will be functional bilinguals. Therefore, the incremental increase will be very small. Where are the mathematics wrong in that? The Minister would have to say it was probably wrong, because it is way too generous compared to the increase we are going to get.
Has the Minister any idea of the number of functional bilinguals up to the standard he mentioned, which is the only correct standard - that is, people who do their business, as I do, in Irish or English, according to the customer's needs, with equal facility? Will the Minister agree that the number is approximately 2% and in some Departments it is less? Therefore, will he not agree that his policy would leave less than 3% capable of fulfilling these positions in the foreseeable future? What proportion of the public service should be sufficiently competent in Irish to provide a wide range of front-line services to the public in that language? What percentage does the Minister think reasonable?
The reason I disagree with the Deputy's mathematics is that it is too sterile an approach. The issue is whether we are going to recruit to try to change and transform the Civil Service immediately.
Or ever.
Please, Deputy.
I do not believe that the current policy, which we have all stood over - particularly Deputy Ó Cuív, who was in government for much of the last decade - has worked, so we need a change. We need to say that we will have a change. I am saying we need functional bilinguals. We have to set a reasonable number for that. Is the Deputy suggesting that everybody we recruit when are recruiting 3% should be a functional bilingual?
Please, Deputy.
The Minister asked me a question.
That would not be fair.
The Deputy asked two other questions. I cannot answer one of them now but I will ask whether we have any data on the number of functional bilinguals that are currently employed.
That is there.
Please, Deputy.
A related and relevant point is how many people seek to do their business with State agencies trí Ghaeilge. That would be an interesting number. There is no point, as we have done in the past, in providing Irish translations of documentation and so on that nobody asks for. We need to match the demand with the provisions.
Is é seo an rud is bunúsaí. Nuair a theastaíonn ó mhuintir na Gaeltachta, nó lucht labhartha na Gaeilge in aon áit sa tír, a gcuid gnó a dhéanamh leis an tseirbhís phoiblí trí Ghaeilge, ba cheart go mbeadh duine éigin ann chun labhairt leo ar an bpointe. Ní chóir go mbeidís ag feitheamh le duine éigin glaoch a chur orthu an lá ina dhiaidh sin. Is é sin an rud is tábhachtaí agus is praiticiúla. An bhfuil go leor daoine sa Roinn Caiteachais Phoiblí agus Athchóirithe i láthair na huaire chun labhairt - ar an bpointe - leo siúd a chuireann glaoch ar an Roinn agus a theastaíonn uathu a gcuid gnó a dhéanamh as Gaeilge? An bhfuil an cheist sin soiléir?
Tá. Aontaím leis an Teachta. Ba chóir go mbeadh sé ar chumas saoránach ar bith a gnó nó a ghnó a dhéanamh trí Ghaeilge más mian leis nó léi, cibé Roinn atá i gceist. Tá mé sásta go bhfuil sé ar chumas muintir mo Roinne a gcuid gnó a dhéanamh as Gaeilge más gá.
Question No. 11 in the name of Deputy Broughan cannot be taken as the Deputy is not present.
Question No. 11 answered with Written Answers.
We will move on to Question No. 12 in the name of Deputy Ó Cuív.
Is Question Time running on?
No. We were delayed in starting and an hour an a quarter is allowed for Question Time.
Departmental Expenditure
Questions (12)
Éamon Ó Cuív
Question:12. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the gross voted current expenditure for 2007 and 2011; the estimated gross voted expenditure for 2014; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16615/14]
View answerOral answers (14 contributions)
Tá mé ag iarraidh eolas a fháil maidir le hollchaiteachas an Stáit i mblianta éagsúla. Is dóigh liom go bhfuil an cheist thar a bheith soiléir.
Gross voted total expenditure in 2007 was €56.4 billion, in 2011 it was €57.4 billion, and for 2014 the estimate is just under €53 billion. Gross voted current expenditure in 2007 was €48.6 billion, in 2011 it was €52.8 billion, and the estimate for 2014 is €49.6 billion, as I have stated previously.
The Deputy is specifically asking about expenditure in 2007, 2011 and 2014. Any analysis focusing solely on those particular years masks expenditure trends in the period, but I think the Deputy knows that. In particular, there were large increases in expenditure between 2007 and 2009 and very challenging fiscal corrections have been required since then which necessitated significant expenditure consolidation. Voted spending has been reduced by more than €10 billion from the 2009 peak of over €63 billion to the present level of €53 billion. The consolidation measures this Government has introduced have ensured Ireland's successful exit from the EU-IMF programme of financial support last year. This consolidation has been achieved while responding to increased needs for public services and supports - and this is evident across the three largest-spending sectors of welfare, health and education.
The live register increased from 159,000 in January 2007 to 470,000 at its peak in July 2011, and we have now seen a reduction of that level to just over 390,000 in March 2014.
There has also been increased pressure on other primary social protection payments such as pensions, working age income supports, working age employment supports and illness supports. These pressures are reflected in the allocation of €19.6 billion for social protection in 2014, which is €4.2 billion above the amount required in 2007.
Consolidation of health expenditure has taken place in a context of significant demands for services. The numbers of medical and GP cards have increased from more than 1.2 million cards in 2007 to an expected outturn of 2 million at the end of last year, a significant increase of 700,000 cards.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
While funding for the Department of Education and Skills Vote increased between 2007 and 2014 by €700 million, this is primarily due to the national training fund and FÁS transferring to the Vote in 2011. Over this period there have been increased demographic pressures on services, with the number of students at primary and secondary school increasing from approximately 814,000 in 2007 to almost 890,000 in 2013.
The efforts of all Ministers and Departments to ensure expenditure targets continue to be met, and that public expenditure remains sustainable, have enabled the Government to focus on protecting and improving public services within the constraints set by the overall national and EU level fiscal frameworks.
What the Minister has basically told me is that whereas the Government always speaks about a huge increase in expenditure, by the time it came into office the hard decisions had already been made to pull it back to €52 billion. Is this correct? The Government only had to make decisions to reduce it to €49 billion. The Minister gave me a whole lot of information I had not sought. When the Government took over the reins its challenge was to bring it from €52 billion to €49 billion and not from the peak figure because we had already addressed this issue. It is still higher than the 2007 figure. Does the Minister accept this?
For the second occasion the Deputy wants to play with figures. In 2007, as I told him, voted current expenditure was €48.6 billion at a time when unemployment payments totalled €159 million.
That was not the question I asked.
This is the reality. Unemployment figures were marching towards 500,000 when the previous Government marched out of office. Needless to say we had to pay for this, and because people's incomes had collapsed the number of medical cards increased from 1.2 million to 2 million and we had to provide money for this also. The Deputy stated the previous Government had done the heavy lifting in 2011. We were in government in 2011. The previous Government passed a budget and then marched out the door. Who implemented it? Who had to do the heavy lifting on that very difficult budget, and argue it and go through it? We had to make all the difficult decisions at the same time as preserving basic services for people. The representation of the truth in the fashion the Deputy wants will not cut any ice with the citizenry in the country.
We will see on 24 May.
Do not count chickens.
We will now move on to deal with amendments from the Seanad to the Fines (Payment and Recovery) Bill 2013.
I understood I was to conclude Second Stage of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission Bill 2014.
Not at this point.
Very well
When will Second Stage of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission Bill 2014 be wrapped up?
After this.
Written Answers follow Adjournment.