Vol. 403 No. 9
13 Mr. Taylor asked the Minister for the Marine if he will outline his role in the administration of the Commissioners of Irish Lights; the resources which have been provided by the Government for the Commissioners in each of the last five years for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
39 Mr. Taylor asked the Minister for the Marine if his attention has been drawn to the fact that approximately 25 lighthouse keepers, under the age of 40, are to be made redundant by the Commissioners of Irish Lights with no immediate pension entitlements; whether all lighthouse keepers are or were, deemed to be in permanent and pensionable employment; if he will exercise his rights and functions under the merchant shipping legislation to ensure that lighthouse keepers under the age of 40 are given an immediate pension in like manner as is being provided for in the case of redundant lighthouse keepers aged over 40; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
(Limerick West): I propose to take Questions Nos. 13 and 39 together.
Under the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, responsibility for the provision and maintenance of lights services, comprising lighthouses, light vessels, beacons and so on, around the coasts of Ireland and Britain is vested in three bodies, known as General Lighthouse Authorities, viz. the Commissioners of Irish Lights who serve the coasts around Ireland, Trinity House which has responsibiity for England and Wales and the Commissioners of Northern Lighthouses, who are responsible for Scotland and the Isle of Man. While the lights in the three areas are separately held and managed by the three lighthouse authorities, the whole system of lights around the coasts of Britain and Ireland is administered as a single financial unit. Expenditure is met from the general lighthouse fund which derives its income from the collection of lights dues in ports in Britain and Ireland.
My Department contribute to the general lighthouse fund in accordance with the terms of a financial agreement reached in 1985 between the Irish and British authorities. The payments over the last five years have been: 1986, Nil; 1987, £1,286,969; 1988, £1,315,369; 1989, £1,463,445; 1990, £2,043,000.
My role vis-à-vis the Commissioners of Irish Lights can best be characterised as that of trustee of the general lighthouse fund.
As regard prospective redundancies among lightkeepers this is an industrial relations matter which is appropriate for settlement between CIL and the relevant unions or under established industrial relations machinery. I have no function in this matter but I am aware of the terms payable to those under 40. They are: preserved pension and additional allowance at age 60; plus a lump sum compensation payment based on age and length of service.
In addition £4,000 per person has been offered to compensate for lack of entitlement to unemployment benefit. CIL inform me that not more than 20 lightkeepers will be under age 40 when made redundant.
I understand that the lightkeepers' union took the redundancy issue to the Labour Court which found that the Commissioners of Irish Lights would not be in breach of the Programme for National Recovery should they issue redundancy notices to their staff. The court recommended further that the terms offered by the Commissioners, including the £4,000 lump sum, be accepted.
In the light of the Labour Court's recommendation, it would be improper of me to interfere in the manner proposed by the Deputy and in any event, as I have already indicated, I have no power to act in that way.
Is the Minister aware that between 20 and 25 lighthouse keepers being made redundant and under the age of 40 were kept to class D1, social insurance contributions, the so-called modified rate, because they were supposed to have been in permanent and pensionable employment? Will the Minister not agree that it is unacceptable that these unfortunate people are now being made redundant and being actively prejudiced because no immediate pension is being provided for them? Will the Minister agree that, as a contributor of £2 million to the fund in 1990, he has a role to play? Will the Minister undertake an examination to improve the position of those workers?
(Limerick West): The scheme, as I have outlined, has not had forced redundancies since it was put into place.
It has now.
(Limerick West): No.
It has now.
(Limerick West): In April 1987 CIL sent a memorandum to all lightkeepers explaining the lighthouse automation programme stating that lightkeeper employment was no longer guaranteed and that no lightkeepers would be recruited after 1997. No compulsory redundancy notices have been issued.
Will the Minister agree that it is absurd that these lighthouse keepers should be made redundant? Does he accept that he has a responsibility to find alternative employment for them? Would he further agree that these lighthouse keepers, in view of the skills they have acquired over the years, might usefully be deployed in coastguard functions which are so necessary around our coast?
(Limerick West): Again, I want to remind the Deputy that there have been no compulsory redundancies to date.
Yet.
(Limerick West): As of now there have been no redundancies. Any retirements that have taken place were on a voluntary basis. They accepted the recommendations which were put forward and agreed by the Labour Court. There have been no redundancies.
We agree that there have been no compulsory redundancies but the Minister and the lighthouse keepers know they will be out of a job by a certain date. That is the reality. The Minister has a responsibility to those lighthouse keepers who have provided a great service around the Irish coast over the years and have a special expertise which should be useful to an island nation such as ours. He has a responsibility to provide employment for them. Would it not be appropriate for the Minister to enter negotiations with the EC to have a marine protection squad around our coast and employ these people in that squad?
We are having an expansion of this question.
(Limerick West): As I said the Commissioners of Irish Lights are the trustees of the general lighthouse fund. Redundancies among lightkeepers is an industrial relations matter appropriate for settlement between the Commissioners of Irish Lights and the relevant unions or under established industrial relations machinery. This matter was brought to the Labour Court and the Commissioners of Irish Lights were not found to be in breach of the Programme for National Recovery. The Labour Court recommendations were brought forward by the Commissioners of Irish Lights. There were no forced redundancies.
A final question from Deputy Taylor.
Is the Minister aware that the Commissioners of Irish Lights have informed all lighthouse keepers that the entire system is being automated and that all lighthouses are to be demanned by 1997 at the latest? Will he not agree that that means willy-nilly that existing lighthouse keepers will be redundant by 1997 at the latest? Will the Minister not agree that his colleague, the Minister for Social Welfare, having put these men on D1 contributions only it would now be a shameful abandonment of them to leave them without any immediate pension rights? Effectively he is saying to men, under the age of 40, that they will have to wait until they reach the age of 65 years before they receive a contributory pension. Will the Minister agree that he is being rather cynical on this whole issue?
(Limerick West): The Minister does not agree and, indeed, the Minister has outlined the information available to him. I stated that the Commissioners of Irish Lights sent a memorandum to all lightkeepers. No lightkeepers will be recruited after 1997 and no compulsory redundancy notices have been issued.
