asked the Taoiseach whether, in view of the statement contained in paragraph 21 of the White Paper on Incomes and Output that the Government deem it necessary that Departments and State-sponsored organisations should not accede for the present to any claims for increases in wages and salaries, or for changes in conditions of work having the same effect, and in view of his statement of 10th February that the Government's White Paper did not envisage or forecast any action to enforce a standstill on wages, he will make a statement to the House clarifying what action in fact is contemplated by the Government following on the publication of the White Paper.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - White Paper on Incomes and Output.
1.
The attention of all Departments of State and State-sponsored organisations has been drawn to the terms of the White Paper.
I do not think that answer clarifies the question that has been asked. Will the Taoiseach answer this question: In the event of the Labour Court or an arbitration board acceding to a demand that was made on them, would the payment of that be prevented by Government action?
There is nothing in the White Paper to that effect. What is indicated is that in respect of remuneration which is paid out of public funds certain considerations will apply, that is to say, the possibility of an award giving rise to a general demand for similar increases in other occupations, or which would be contrary to the national economic interests generally.
This matter will be debated next week but let me put it this way: If the Labour Court decide in respect of a State-sponsored company to accede to a demand for an increase in wages, will they be allowed to pay it?
We will expect that State-sponsored bodies have regard to the considerations set out in the White Paper.
Answer yes or no.
Does the Deputy want a final yes or no answer to that question?
Yes.
It seems to me the position can be easily understood by those who study the White Paper.
You have not answered yes or no.
The Taoiseach states in his White Paper—or the Minister did—that Government Departments and State-sponsored organisations should not accede to any claims for wage increases. Is that a direction?
That is not in the White Paper. Read it again.
Paragraph 21 says "the Government deem it necessary that Departments and State-sponsored organisations should not accede for the present to any claims for increases in wages and salaries ..."
That is only half a sentence, as usual.
"or for changes in conditions of work having the same effect, which would arouse expectations of similar increases in other employments."
That is the point.
Will Labour Court awards be honoured by State-sponsored companies?
We ask that State-sponsored bodies will not accede to demands for increases in wages and salaries which could start off another general round of wage increases.
Even if recommended by the Labour Court?
This is document No. 3 then, to-day.
That is what is in the White Paper.
No.
The impression I get is that very few people have read it.
2.
asked the Taoiseach if he has any further explanation concerning his failure to consult with the Irish Congress of Trade Unions prior to the issuing of the White Paper Closing the Gap (on Incomes and Output).
I wish to put on record in this House the comment which I made on the 10th instant regarding the statement issued on the previous day by the Executive Council of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions. I said :—
"The Government have a clear and obvious duty to inform the public of the state of the national economy and to advise on the courses of action which will promote its progress or which could endanger it. This duty is paramount and could not be made subject to the concurrence of other bodies. The Government have, while preserving—as they must—their own final function of decision, constantly followed the practice of regular consultations with all organisations—including the Irish Congress of Trade Unions— which can speak for important economic interests. There is, in fact, little in the White Paper which has not been frequently said before in statements made on behalf of the Government."
I cannot usefully add to this statement except to direct the Deputy's attention to Paragraph 19 of the White Paper which states that the Government contemplate discussions with representatives of workers and employers.
Is the Taoiseach aware that Congress did not ask that they should concur in the views expressed in the White Paper but that they should have been consulted?
Arising out of the Taoiseach's reply, is there any good reason why, if he had these notions in his mind, he would not send for the Executive of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and say: "Look. The Government are thinking in the following terms", and indicate to the Executive of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions what the terms were, the reasons for them and, generally, endeavour to get from Congress a reasoned view as to what, in the opinion of an experienced body like Congress, should be done in the circumstances with which the Taoiseach was dealing? Congress did not ask for its agreement. The indignation of Congress is that it ought to be consulted and had a point of view to contribute.
As I have said on the occasion when I made the statement which I have already quoted, there is little in the White Paper that has not been previously said on many occasions in statements made on behalf of the Government.
Is there any reason why Congress should not be consulted? The Taoiseach has certainly succeeded in irritating them and blunting their enthusiasm for what everybody desires, namely, the promotion of harmony.
For my part, since I first became a member of a Government, 30 years ago, I have never once refused to meet representatives of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions or the Trade Union Congress. Whenever they wished to express views to me, I have always been available.
Nobody knew that this was coming up.
Is it not a fact that on previous occasions over the last few years, particularly when our entry into EEC was being considered, Congress was asked for and gave full co-operation and, out of common courtesy, would it not have been more reasonable if the Taoiseach had invited Congress to discuss the matter and then had made his own statement about it after he had heard their views?
There is another aspect of this matter, that is, whether, in fact, Congress would have wished to have been consulted before that White Paper was issued.
They said they were.
After the event.
There is enough without the Tánaiste getting into it.