Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 21 July 2020
21. Deputy Ged Nash asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he plans to engage with public sector trade unions on a successor to the public sector agreement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16819/20]
View answer28. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform his plans to adhere to the 2% pay restoration for public sector workers in October 2020 as agreed under the Public Service Stability Agreement 2018-2020; and his policy approach to public sector pay thereafter. [16866/20]
View answerI congratulate the Minister of State on his new appointment and the Minister of State, Deputy Ossian Smyth, on his new role. I wish them both well.
As they will both know, the current public sector pay agreement will expire soon. I am pleased that in recent correspondence from the previous Government received by the Labour Party, there is a commitment to honouring the next and final phase of the public sector pay deal that is currently in place. The programme for Government commits to this Administration seeking to negotiate a new deal with public sector trade unions.
Will the Minister of State provide details on the engagement that he, or the Minister, Deputy Michael McGrath, or departmental officials have had to date with the public sector committee of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions? When does the Minister of State expect the talks on a potential successor agreement to take place?
I apologise on behalf of the Minister, Deputy Michael McGrath, who had to step out of the Chamber. I propose to take Questions Nos. 21 and 28 together.
As the Deputies will be aware, the current public sector pay agreement, the Public Service Stability Agreement 2018-2020, will expire at the end of the year. The agreement was passed into law by the House in the Public Service Pay and Pensions Act 2017 and we have committed to honouring the agreement in full. The final commitment under this agreement is to a 2% increase in salaries, due on 1 October. This will be made as scheduled under the 2017 Act. Proceeding with the payment is both in recognition of the contribution that public servants have made in dealing with the public health emergency and a demonstration of our commitment to collective agreements. It demonstrates the Government's belief in the benefits of a collective approach to public service industrial relations. The Public Service Stability Agreement has allowed us as a Government to dismantle the financial emergency legislation while providing certainty in our fiscal planning. I think most people would agree it has served us well.
The House will also be aware that within the programme for Government, as Deputy Nash noted, there is a commitment to seeking to negotiate a new agreement with the public service unions. Our approach to any engagement, however, will need to take full account of the State's current financial circumstances and outlook. The Minister looks forward to engaging with the public service unions on these matters in the coming months.
The Minister of State stated, "Proceeding with the payment is both in recognition of the contribution that public servants have made in dealing with the public health emergency". I do not necessarily agree. It is simply a case of honouring an agreement that the Government is duty bound to honour with public and civil servants throughout the country. I nonetheless welcome the commitment to the principle of collective agreements in managing the public service in future and engaging with the public sector trade unions on that basis for pay reform and other matters.
If the pandemic tells us anything, it is that only the State has the power and authority to work collectively when push comes to shove to keep us all safe and well. I hope that rather than simply applauding them, lighting candles for them or getting pictures taken for social media, as Ministers lined up to do in recent months, to thank and express our gratitude to healthcare assistants, radiographers, laboratory technicians, doctors, nurses and teachers we will ensure that the approach we take properly values the contribution that public servants make to our society.
It should be remembered that not all public servants are well paid. Many earn below what might be considered the hourly rate of the living wage. If we are to talk about a living wage, the Government needs to lead by example and ensure that the few thousand public servants who do not garner an income that would qualify as a living wage are addressed in the context of public sector pay negotiations that may occur in the next few months.
I draw the Deputy's attention to the second part of the sentence he quoted, where I stated proceeding with the payment was also a "demonstration of our commitment to collective agreements." We committed to that in the programme for Government and no timeframe has yet been laid out within which the Minister will enter into negotiations with unions. He has committed to the House that he intends to do it in the coming months. The next budget is only around the corner and we all know that when the recess finishes in September, discussions on that will get under way immediately. There needs to be a successor to the agreement, which served us well. It was negotiated against a difficult backdrop and in good faith, as has been demonstrated.
Both sides, and not just the Government, have acted in good faith and come to the table responsibly. The agreement has been demonstrated, across all elements of the public sector, to have been in the best interests of the public, which the public sector serves. We are all public servants.
Deputy Nash is correct that nobody has a monopoly on concern when it comes to front-line workers. Many of us have family members working on the front line.
