asked the Minister for Tourism, Transport and Communications if he will intervene in the imminent dispute that threatens to stop B & I services and use his office to facilitate a settlement.
Private Notice Questions. - B & I Services Threatened Stoppage.
I agreed, following consultation with my colleagues, the Ministers for Finance and Labour, in October 1990, to a request from the Irish Congress of Trade Unions for the establishment of a liaison group involving senior officials of my Department and representatives of the ICTU unions concerned. A series of meetings of the liaison group have been held over recent months in a positive and co-operative spirit.
For my part I have made substantial concessions from our opening position in response to the legitimate concerns which the ICTU group have expressed. I accept that the ICTU group have also made corresponding concessions. I am confident that, with continued goodwill on all sides, we can reach a satisfactory solution which will enable us all to achieve our common goal, which is a strong and competitive Irish company on our major trading routes utilising Irish maritime expertise.
The trade union representatives confirmed in a joint press statement with my Department issued on 5 April that they were prepared to positively co-operate with the sale of B & I to Irish Ferries provided they got adequate assurances on key conditions affecting their members.
Let me briefly comment on each of these issues: the first is a clearly defined investment programme. Irish Continental Group have given the trade unions a clear indication of their investment plans for the company. This amounts to an investment of over £30 million in upgrading and replacement of ships over the next three to five years which will be funded by borrowings and by Irish Continental Group's cash flow. This represents a substantial investment in the future of the company and is concrete proof of the commitment of the new owner to the development of a strong Irish company on all our major trading routes. In fairness, I must say that the trade unions accept it as such also. Therefore, I am convinced that this key demand is being met. The second condition relates to security of employment.
The Irish Continental Group have presented their proposals to the trade unions for the reorganisation of B & I. These involved gross redundancies of 269 and net redundancies of 253. This is the lowest number of redundancies of any proposal I have received in relation to the acquisition of B & I. The Irish Continential Group informed the trade unions that their proposals will secure the future by making B & I a competitive company, providing a top class service to customers and security and good conditions for all its employees.
The third condition relates to terms and conditions of employment. We all accept that changes must be made in this area if the company is to become more competitive and survive. The changes needed are a matter for agreement between the trade unions and the Irish Continental Group who must take account of their commercial implications.
However I must express my disappointment at the fact that a strike has been called by the trade unions without any negotiations on the Irish Continental Group proposals which were presented to them on Friday last.
The fourth condition relates to our strategic national shipping interest.
I want to assure this House, as I have the trade unions concerned, that the Government accept the need for the protection of our strategic national shipping interest. Following some positive suggestions put forward by the B & I Group of Unions, we have agreed to produce a mutually acceptable formula which will recognise the common interest we both share in this area. The final key condition relates to industrial democracy. Again this is a problem which can be solved amicably. ICG, Irish Continental Group, have offered to consider a sub-board structure to meet this condition.
Overall I am sure the House will agree that substantial progress has been made on this issue. The General Secretary of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions wrote to me on 11 April last stating that ICTU were convinced that the current discussions between all interested parties on the restructuring of B & I could be dealt with peacefully and constructively provided certain issues were addressed.
I responded to him expressing my confidence that, with goodwill on all sides, a satisfactory solution could be reached which would enable all concerned to achieve the common goal of creating a strong and competitive Irish shipping company on our major trading routes utilising Irish maritime expertise.
That is my stated public stance and my firm belief.
We have a company which everybody, including the trade unions' financial advisers, agrees is facing major cash difficulties. We have a unique opportunity to preserve all that is good in that company, and there are many good things in it, in a new strong and development oriented Irish shipping line. We all want to achieve this but if we cannot get agreement on how it can be achieved, then we will have to reassess our position.
In view of the severe constraints on the public finances, the Government have decided to end Exchequer support for B & I at the earliest possible time. Having examined all the options for achieving this, the Government are convinced that the sale to ICG offers the best prospects for securing the future of the company and its employees.
Let me be clear about one thing. This is the best deal possible for B & I and the taxpayer. It offers a future for B & I as part of an enlarged Irish company strong enough to meet competition. Over £100 million has been invested in B & I by the taxpayer, with a similar sized estimate required over the next decade. This had to stop. I appeal to those involved to call off the strike tomorrow, to talk out the situation urgently and to see this deal through. The alternative is very bleak and I could not guarantee that B & I would remain in business if this sale were not to proceed immediately.
To conclude, let me say again that I am confident we can resolve current problems relating to the future of B & I. I am today inviting the Irish Congress of Trade Unions to meet with my Department as soon as possible to see how this matter can be progressed.
Regrettably, the earlier part of the Minister's contribution is unrecognisable from the version I received today from the group of unions involved. May I refer the Minister to article 84 of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress which specifically requires that there will be no change in the ownership structure of any commercial semi-State company unless it is in the best interests of the employees and there is the consultation to which the Minister referred? Does the Minister agree that there can be no negotiations with the unions when only the unions are prepared to negotiate? Is he aware of the correspondence issued to every worker in B & I at the weekend setting out in unequivocal terms the new conditions which are drastically inferior to the conditions they now enjoy, and that these new conditions are on a take it or leave it basis. Contrary to what the Minister has said about commitments in the area of an investment programme, there are no commitments that in any way assuage the fears of the unions. There are no commitments to investment in the company or to industrial democracy nor, indeed, is there any assurance that certain routes will not be sold off. Therefore, the strategic interest of the company in the shipping sense has not been assured. In terms of his commitment to meet the Congress of Trade Unions on this matter now will the Minister agree to meet the trade unions directly concerned so that what appears to be an extraordinary gulf in his information on this dispute can be put to him directly?
Quite the contrary, I think the Deputy's information is way behind, I have met the Congress of Trade Unions on this matter and I have met the group of trade unions. I had a meeting arranged for today but unfortunately the officials involved in the unions had to change it but they are coming to see me very shortly. There was a liaison group between my Department and the Irish Congress of Trade Unions going back to last October which met on a regular basis. I doubt if there has ever been an issue in which there has been so much consultation between the unions and the Department concerned. There has been day-in day-out consultations between my Department, the unions involved, the Department of Labour and the company. The Deputy must understand that the company involved in the proposed purchase of the B & I company are a privately owned company and there are certain limits to which any Minister can go in dictating to them.
Can the Minister confirm that the statement I have here — this was issued yesterday by the Irish Congress of Trade Unions—makes quite clear the version of events I have outlined and is seeking the involvement of the Minister to cause negotiations to happen, because there have been no negotiations across the table that in any way reassure the union concerned; it has been a take it or leave it situation? Specifically, may I ask the Minister whether, on the other conditions that he chose not to put on the record of the House, there is any movement on the part of the Government? For example, will the Government at this stage confirm, agreeing to the union demand, that there ought to be a special share retained by him when this company are privatised as happened in the case of the Sugar Company?
That is a very long supplementary. It does not refer entirely to the question.
It is very pertinent.
The question must be supplementary to the question that is taken. We cannot move into other areas.
With regard to the golden share issue, I said in my reply and I repeat, that in our discussions with the liaison committee and our talks with the unions generally, some positive suggestions came forward from the B & I group of unions. These were in a formula with which we can both agree in the matter of the protection of our strategic national shipping interest. I am confident that we can agree a formula that handles that situation.
Deputy Byrne rose.
I indicated earlier that ordinarily on Special Notice Questions we try to confine supplementaries to the Deputy in whose name the question was tabled.
I appreciate that but you established a precedent that we are allowed to ask a brief supplementary in special circumstances.
In the exceptional circumstances, yes, but I would ask you to put a brief question.
Thank you. The Minister referred on at least two occasions to goodwill and said we could have a solution if goodwill was forthcoming. Would the Minister agree that the goodwill is forthcoming from the group of unions and that the strike which is about to take place tomorrow is the result of the lack of goodwill on the part of the Irish Continental Group and the Minister's Department. In the light of the past performance by the workforce in B & I where they made tremendous sacrifices in the matter of jobs in that industry, to be asked to reduce the workforce by 253 more——
Could Deputy Byrne introduce some interrogative and indicate to us that he is asking a question rather than making a statement and giving information?
Would the Minister agree that the trade union movement is fully involved in the matter of goodwill but that the goodwill is not forthcoming from the Irish Continental Group or the Minister?
That is not the situation. I have today again invited the Irish Congress of Trade Unions to meet my Department to see how we can progress the matter. Over the next few days I will be looking forward to a meeting with the group of unions and we will see how we can progress the matter. I must remind the Deputy that the future of the company was looked at very carefully and professionally. A number of options were examined. Invitations were sought from the marketplace to look at the future of the company. The one that best suited and gave B & I a future is the one which is on the table. The Deputy needs to concern himself with the possible alternatives to seeing this operation through. I am determined that we will see it through and that we will see a strong Irish company operating our major strategic routes. I appreciate that the company workforce have made substantial sacrifices over many years. I am trying to preserve a company, to put it on strategic routes and ensure its continuance on those routes.
I am trying to ensure the future of the company. After looking at the entire marketplace I am satisfied that this is the only sensible way forward involving the least number of redundancies. I again appeal to the unions involved to work with me to secure the future of B & I.
May I ask one very brief final supplementary? Does the Minister consider it reasonable that one of the proposals put to the unions is that 95 per cent of the entire white collar staff would be put on a recruitment grade at an average pay reduction of about £5,000 per head? Are they the kind of reasonable negotiations the Minister is endorsing in the House?
"Yellowpack" workers.
The Deputy must appreciate that the Government are not negotiating with the unions on terms for the future. The Deputy seems to overlook one key fact which is that the company who have made the offer to take over B & I are a privately owned company on the Irish Stock Exchange and that they have to negotiate the best possible deal for all concerned. I am not directly negotiating; I am trying to be helpful to all sides in achieving a strong Irish ferry company.
Does the Minister condone it?