I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
In his statement in the Dáil on 11 and 13 December last the Taoiseach announced a number of changes in the structure and functions of Government. Those changes, which dealt with the reassignment of functions between Departments of State and consequential changes in ministerial and departmental titles, have already been affected by Government Orders. Two of the Taoiseach's proposals, however, require the amendment of existing legislation and hence the introduction of this Bill.
The proposals referred to are—first, to bring the Departments of Labour and the Public Service together under one Minister, and second, to increase the number of Ministers of State from ten to 15. The opportunity presented by the amending legislation required to give effect to these proposals is also being availed of to make certain other technical amendments to the Ministers and Secretaries Acts.
As regards the first proposals, the position at present is that section 3 (3) of the Ministers and Secretaries (Amendment) Act, 1973, provides that the Department of Finance and the Department of the Public Service shall be assigned to the same person. Before the department of the Public Service can be assigned to a member of the Government who is not also the Minister for Finance, it is necessary to repeal this provision.
Deputies will be aware that most of the functions exercised by the Department of the Public Service since they were set up in 1973 were transferred from the Department of Finance. The main principle underlying the creation of the new Departments was that it would enable adequate attention to be given to, and adequate skills to be developed in, the important areas of personnel management, including industrial relations, and organisation which had hitherto been, inevitably, subordinated to financial, fiscal and economic matters in the Department of Finance.
The creation of the Department followed from the recommendations of the Public Services Organisation Review Group who had also recommended that the Department should be assigned to the member of the Government who was also Minister for Finance. However, the needs of Government are never static; circumstances change and the structures in operation at any given time must be flexible enough to respond. The changes announced by the Taoiseach are part of that process.
Since the establishment of the Department of the Public Service in 1973, the successful management of industrial relations has emerged as one of the main requirements for national progress. The Government have a twofold role. The Minister for Labour is responsible not only for providing much of the institutional framework and all of the legislative basis for industrial relations matters; he is also concerned with fostering a constructive climate in the industrial relations field.
At the same time, the Government are, directly or indirectly, the largest employer in the State. In broad terms, over a quarter of the work force and well over a third of those employed on the basis of a wage or salary are public servants. The Minister for the Public Service is responsible for a co-ordinated approach to industrial relations in the public service. Because of the size, both relative and absolute, of the public service and the variety of occupational groups it encompasses, movements in the public service obviously exercise a major influence on the whole economy. Trouble in the public service is trouble for the country. At this juncture in our affairs the situation requires that the Government's two roles in the industrial relations area should be co-ordinated at ministerial level.
The Government have, therefore, decided to assign the Departments of Labour and the Public Service to the same Minister. While there has in the past always been a high degree of coordination between the two Departments, their assignment to the one Minister will extend and deepen this co-operation. This Bill, by removing the requirement that the Minister for the Public Service and the Minister for Finance shall be the same person, will make it possible to assign the Department of the Public Service to the member of the Government who is also Minister for Labour. I would not be foolish enough to suppose that this is a panacea for curing all industrial relations problems. It is, however, the visible manifestation of the Government's determination to get to grips with the problems in this area and to ensure that there is a fully co-ordinated approach to these problems.
Before concluding on this aspect of the Bill, I would like to make myself clear on a number of points. The change in ministerial responsibility does not in any way imply diminished commitment to the existing programmes of the two Departments concerned. The Department of the Public Service, for example, will continue to perform their central staff role for the Government in relation to the organisation and personnel functions in the public service. In particular, there will be no change in the priority to be accorded to the various programmes for the reorganisation of the public service in terms of structures and personnel policies. The Department of Labour will also continue to perform their many important functions in addition to those which are directly related to the industrial relations area. For example, their work in regard to the safety, health and welfare of workers and manpower policy, including training and retraining of workers, will have a high priority. The importance of schemes for creation of employment particularly for young people and for protection against redundancy is self-evident and will, of course, continue to have a major role in the Department of Labour.
The second major provision of this Bill is the proposal to increase the number of Ministers of State from ten to 15. At present, section 1 of the Ministers and Secretaries (Amendment) (No 2) Act, 1977, restricts the maximum number of Minister of State to ten. This Bill provides for an increase in the maximum number of Ministers of State to 15.
It is only a little more than two years ago since this House debated in great depth the many issues arising from the creation of the office of Minister of State. Prior to the creation in 1977 of the office of Minister of State the business of Government was allocated between 15 Ministers of Government who had the assistance of seven Parliamentary Secretaries. This situation had existed for 40 years despite the ever-growing range and complexity of Government business. When we introduced the 1977 Act we made two fundamental changes. First, we abolished the office of Parliamentary Secretary and replaced it with a new office of Minister of State which would give greater responsibilities. Second, we increased the number of posts available to lend assistance to Ministers of the Government from seven Parliamentary Secretaries to ten Ministers of State. As I have said, this House debated those measures in great depth at the time. I am heartened by the knowledge that there was general acceptance on both sides of the House of the need for the measures proposed. Nobody was in any doubt as to the dramatic changes that had come about in the nature and complexity of Government business. The impact of economic development, technological change and, particularly, our entry into the EEC placed inordinate demands, on the limited number of people available to deal with them. Indeed, in 1977 such was the widespread acceptance of the need for the measures proposed that one of the considerations arising from the Opposition side was that the creation of ten posts of Minister of State would not be sufficient to meet the needs that existed at the time. In replying to that debate the Tánaiste and then Minister for the Public Service pointed out that time would tell whether ten Ministers of State would be sufficient.
We have now had over two years in which to judge this issue from experience. In this period the demands giving rise to the 1977 Act have not diminished. On the contrary, these demands have grown. We have had the continuing growth of responsibilities in relation to all aspects of EEC matters. There has also been a continuing increase in the demands made on Ministers on the home front. There has also been a dramatic increase in the demands being made on politicians generally and Ministers in particular by the general public in terms of the service the public require. We are now dealing with an electorate that is more articulate and better informed than ever before. Such an electorate demand a more sophisticated level of service from their elected representatives. Each and every Deputy in this House will be aware of these developments. The results of the combination of these factors can be seen in the expansion of the roles, functions and activities of the various Government Departments.
Over and above these considerations, there is the question of the role and influence of the Oireachtas. In all democracies there is a feeling that, because of the increasing complexity of the business of Government, the institutions of the State are not sufficiently answerable to Parliament. We are now in the process of taking corrective action. We have an active Joint Committee of both Houses looking into the affairs of the commercial State-sponsored bodies; a Bill to establish the office of Ombudsman has been introduced; and the present measure will ensure that the number of Members of the Oireachtas answerable to the Houses for the management of the public business is brought to a realistic level.
As I have said, we have now had more than two years to judge whether ten Ministers of State are sufficient to cater for these ever-increasing demands. There is, of course, as Deputies know, a constitutional limit of 15 on the number of Ministers of the Government. If, therefore, we are to meet all the needs to which I have referred, it is essential that the number of Ministers of State be increased. As already stated by the Taoiseach, this means, in the case of some Departments of State, the assignment to them of more than one Minister of State because of the scope and complexity of the business they discharge. The process of Government is becoming an increasingly sophisticated one. We can no longer hope to respond in a piecemeal manner to the challenge being posed. Neither can we expect to share out ever-increasing burdens among a constant number of hard-pressed individuals without affecting the level of service being delivered. Our experience in the last two years or so has convinced us of the necessity of having the number of Ministers of State increased to 15. This measure, together with the rationalisation of functions at ministerial, and departmental levels already announced by the Taoiseach, will mean that we are moving into the new decade with a full strength team equipped to meet the challenge ahead.
I said at the outset that the opportunity afforded by the amending legislation required to provide for increasing the maximum number of Ministers of State and for having a person other than the Minister for Finance appointed as Minister for the Public Service was being availed of to make certain other technical amendments to the Ministers and Secretaries Acts. First, the 1977 Act makes no provision for the termination of the appointment of a Minister of State on his becoming a member of the Government, nor for his resignation for any other reason. I am proposing that such provision now be made. Second, section 7 (4) of the 1939 Act provided, in the case of the office of Parliamentary Secretary, that his appointment or tenure of office would not be affected where another member of the Government was nominated to act for the Minister having charge of the Department to which he was assigned. I propose here to make a similar provision for the office of Minister of State. Finally, as regards technicalities, section 2 (1) (6) of the Statutory Instruments Act, 1947, still contains a reference to the obsolete office of Parliamentary Secretary. I am proposing that the office of Minister of State be substituted in the relevant section for the office of Parliamentary Secretary.
In conclusion, I would say to the House that those measures announced by the Taoiseach which have already been carried out by Government orders together with the provisions of this Bill represent part of the on-going commitment of this Government to the reorganisation of the public service to meet the challenges of the present day. This is a process which will continue at departmental level under my aegis as Minister for the Public Service. Looking at all the relevant factors, I can confidently recommend the provisions of this Bill to the House as part of this process and as a major step towards providing this country with more effective and efficient Government machinery.