John Bruton
Ceist:1 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the plans, if any, he has to meet the social partners. [14628/97]
Ceisteanna—Questions. - Meetings with Social Partners.
John Bruton
Ceist:2 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the meetings, if any, he has had with the social partners since 26 June 1997; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14661/97]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.
I took an early opportunity, on 29 July, to meet all 19 of the social partner organisations at a Partnership 2000 meeting held in Dublin Castle. At that meeting there were detailed exchanges of views with the social partners on a variety of topics. I reiterated the Government's commitment to honouring in full the terms of the partnership agreement. The text of my address on that occasion was published by the GIS.
In my address, I outlined the need for economic and social progress to be made simultaneously so that there is the most equitable distribution possible of the benefits of economic growth. I promised the Government's programme would be implemented in a manner compatible with the commitments set out in Partnership 2000 and which, in many ways, extends them. I acknowledged the valuable contribution that social partnership has made over the past ten years and its increasing importance in managing future growth and tackling social exclusion. With regard to future growth, I recognised the importance of fostering the agriculture and food sectors as well as the important contribution which a modernised public service can make. On social exclusion, I reaffirmed the Government's commitment to the national anti-poverty strategy.
Also in my statement, I said Ireland's economic progress has been made against a background of wage moderation and industrial peace. I urged the maintenance of these policies to enhance our competitiveness. The National Competitiveness Council and the National Centre for Partnership will have an important benchmarking and demonstration role in this. In particular, the centre will have a special role in replicating, at the level of the enterprise, the success of partnership at national level.
Since my address to the social partners in July, I have been regularly informed of all the relevant developments by the Partnership 2000 secretariat which is based in my Department. Under the terms of Partnership 2000, as part of the monitoring procedures I will attend an annual meeting with all the parties to the agreement. Clearly, apart from such formal meetings, I will continue to avail of informal and private occasions to meet the individual social partner organisations. Over the course of the past month, I have had detailed and informal discussions with a number of organisations on a variety of issues relating to the implementation of Partnership 2000.
In addition, there is ongoing contact between my officials and the social partners on almost a daily basis in the context of a variety of working groups. As we speak, the Partnership 2000 secretariat, which includes the social partners and relevant Departments, is meeting to discuss the detailed progress which has been made on the implementation of the commitments in the partnership agreement in advance of the next quarterly meeting in Dublin Castle on 13 October.
In addition to direct contact by my Department with the social partners, both the NESC and NESF operate under my aegis. The council and the forum have been given the tasks of benchmarking the implementation of Partnership 2000 and monitoring progress on the social inclusion elements, respectively.
What precise developments at farm level in the private sector does the Taoiseach expect to occur as a result of the activities of the recently established body to promote partnership? Has he any specific recommendations to make?
I agree with the Taoiseach on the need for equity with regard to income distribution. Does he agree the farming community faces an income crisis this autumn? The failure to implement the proposed national compensation scheme in the beef sector is a big disappointment to people who face major losses. There is no evidence of a medium-term plan to give hope to young people entering agriculture.
The agreement is based on a macro-economic framework covering the period of the plan. With regard to the private sector, we are actively engaged in looking constructively at the sectors, developments and initiatives we can advance and the agreements we can reach to create employment. The emphasis is on increasing employment growth. Progress has been made in a number of sectors, tourism and the software industry in particular, and in matching what we are trying to achieve in the educational system with what the social partners are trying to do in the private sector.
There are some difficulties with regard to agriculture. The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry has just returned from Cairo where he has endeavoured to promote Irish beef exports, whether live or processed. In talks with the agricultural members of the social partners — with whom I had the opportunity to meet about three weeks ago — we are examining the issues with which we can assist. The sector has had a number of satisfactory years and we wish that to continue.
When does the Taoiseach expect live cattle exports to Egypt will resume?
We will not see that happen in the short term.
That is not what the Minister said last June. He was full of answers then.
It is more likely we will increase substantially the exports of processed beef to Egypt. That is in line with Egyptian policy which we must respect. We must make the necessary adjustments to increase our exports.
Given the importance of taxation reductions, particularly for the PAYE sector, in the partnership with the social partners did the Taoiseach repeat the commitments made by him and the Tánaiste during the election campaign that there will be £500 million worth of tax reductions for the PAYE sector in the forthcoming budget?
We must await budget day to see what the budget will hold for the PAYE sector. It is in our interests to maintain pay moderation. The policy pursued by successive Governments and pursued by me since 1987 is pay moderation in return for tax reductions. That policy has proved successful; it has managed to give us one of the lowest inflation rates in the EU and has allowed us to generate employment.
Did the social partners the Taoiseach met include the community platform? If not, can he indicate when he proposes to meet representatives of the community sector and ensure their views, which were incorporated so successfully in the negotiations for Partnership 2000, will be included?
In view of the Taoiseach's commitment to the national anti-poverty strategy, can he indicate what new mechanisms he has put in place to ensure that strategy is implemented? I have heard disturbing rumours that structures that would have ensured implementation of the strategy have been largely dismantled.
On taxation, can the Taoiseach ensure in the drafting of the budget that tax reform or other tax elements of the budget are balanced with the need to ensure that expenditure is available to implement the national anti-poverty strategy? We must end a practice under which children starting school in working-class areas of Dublin are in classes of 32 pupils. It is disgraceful.
The Government is committed to the implementation of the national anti-poverty strategy. The various systems put in place for that are continuing and I do not know of any that have been undone.
On taxation, our policy is based on a proper fiscal and monetary policy, our obligations under the Maastricht Treaty and the stability pact signed last December. We intend to use both tax reductions and necessary expenditures in areas dealing with social exclusion and deprivation as well as disadvantaged education. Those are all priorities in that area.
In my meetings with the social partners I met the four pillars. I have had separate meetings with a number of the social partners in their categories as pay groups, which are set down in Partnership 2000. I have met the farmers, trade unions and others. I have not met the members of the four pillars separately, but I have met the disabled group and the National Youth Council.
Would I be wrong in assuming from the somewhat noncommittal reply of the Taoiseach to Deputy Spring's question on the delivery of promises to the PAYE sectors that these very dear promises, unequivocal before the election, are becoming contingent? Can we count on the promises of cuts in taxation made by the Deputy's party before the election being met in full in the budget?
As the Deputy will be aware, we have an occasion when the financial announcements for the following year are made and those announcements will be made then. The Deputy would be wrong in believing this Government will not continue to do what it has successfully done since 1987 with just a short break: reducing the burden on the PAYE sector.
That is a definite maybe.
(Dublin West): Is the Taoiseach aware of the extreme dissatisfaction among the organised workforce relating to social partnership? They see social partnership as being used to hold wage increases to an absolute minimum while private profits have been allowed to boom.
Is the Taoiseach aware of similar dissatisfaction regarding the so-called concept of social partnership when anti-trade union employers are given a free hand to block trade union organisation and representation in their workplaces?
I am aware that over the years there have been objections from certain sections of the trade union movement in relation to social partnership. Some adopted an ideological opposition to it while others adopt a more pragmatic view and change their views from programme to programme. The overwhelming majority of Irish organised workers has been in favour of social partnership as it has reduced their taxation levels from what a decade ago stood at 65, 58 and 35 per cent respectively. At that time there was huge unemployment, extremely high interest and inflation rates and the Exchequer borrowing requirement and current budget deficit here were among the worst in the OECD countries. Social partnership has successfully managed to change all of that and the main beneficiary has been organised labour. Improvements can always be made and progress must continue to be made on the objectives set out in Partnership 2000. Those are the priorities which must be followed in the 39 month period covered by the programme and the policies contained therein must be pursued.
In addition a separate section dealt with exclusion, deprivation and educational needs for the disadvantaged. That was an extension of what had been in the earlier three programmes all of which were very beneficial for organised labour. The Government will continue to do what its predecessors have done and will try to implement these proposals to the best of its ability.
(Dublin West): What about victimisation?
A working group has been set up to look at the issue of trade union recognition and it will report in due course. The Irish Congress of Trade Unions and employers' organisations regard this as a serious matter; the working group is looking at what can happen to companies, particularly indigenous ones, which do not allow workers to join unions in any organised fashion or to gain recognition.
As a former trade unionist, would the Taoiseach agree that the levels of pay in certain sectors of services and industry are unacceptably low? Would he agree that any future partnership arrangement should include a serious agreement on a national minimum rate in the interests of workers, low paid and otherwise, who have been exploited, particularly those in unorganised employment?
The Government, since its election, set up a commission to deal with this issue and with the difficulties which have long existed on joint labour committees to seek an hourly minimum wage. It is hoped that group will complete its work towards the end of the year.