Vol. 526 No. 4
71 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the number of days lost through industrial disputes in 1999 and 2000 to date; the steps she plans to take to deal with the growing industrial relations problems; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [26553/00]
During 1999, 215,000 man days were lost due to industrial action, of which 170,000 can be accounted for by one dispute, namely, the nurses dispute. According to figures released by the Central Statistics Office at the end of September, 26,353 days were lost due to industrial disputes during the first six months of this year compared to 28,191 for the first six months of 1999.
I am concerned at the extent of industrial action taking place and threatened. This has to be seen in the context of very clear procedures on industrial peace and stabilisation agreed between the parties earlier this year in the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness. More generally, the industrial relations and dispute resolution procedures and institutions in place are essentially those which the parties themselves desire. It is incumbent on those parties to work with these procedures and institutions and to accept and respect the outcomes.
I call on employers and trade unions to recommit themselves to reaching agreement through negotiations where the parties cannot agree among themselves and to use the Labour Relations Commission and the Labour Court whose record at settling disputes is excellent.
Whatever about the number of man days lost, given that people cannot get to work in the morning, cannot get to hospital, to the airport or get a taxi, cannot get their children to school or, if they can, there is nobody to teach them, cannot have planning applications approved in the area of local government, and given the teachers' dispute and the problems in regard to transport, health and so on, does the Minister agree the country is gradually descending into industrial chaos? Is anybody's hand on the tiller? Is there anybody in charge or is it the Government's strategy that the issue of worsening and deteriorating industrial relations ought to be left to the agencies to sort out and that there is no political responsibility for the chaos all around us?
To put it at its mildest, I share the Deputy's concern at the public being discomforted and greatly inconvenienced as a result of the industrial disputes we have witnessed, many of which are in the public sector. Today's blockade by taximen disrupting the travelling public, not just in Dublin, but elsewhere, cannot and will not be tolerated.
A scandal.
Those who break the law will have to suffer the consequences of law-breaking. I appeal to people to sit down and discuss the issues and not to engage in discommoding the travelling public. Some people seem content in bringing the country to a standstill.
These disputes are in breach of the industrial peace clause in the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness. Many in disputes are looking for settlements that are way outside the terms of that programme. It is not just the responsibility of the Government to have its hands on the tiller; management and trade unions also have a responsibility to give leadership and ensure the programme, to which we all signed up, is implemented. In the 1970s, this country nearly ground to a halt and we were on the verge of bankruptcy. If we recall, some 15 or so years ago, the dire consequences for this economy when we did not honour our commitments, I am sure no-one will want to return to those days. Inflation has put pressure on the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness but, in the context of the budget, that is the priority for the Government. What should concern workers and their representatives is real take home pay. That has been substantially increased, by more than 30% in real terms, during the lifetime of social partnership. That has not been achieved in any other economy. It is through agreement and consensus, and honouring those agreements, that we will continue to generate the kind of economic prosperity we have been pleased to experience in recent years.
The Minister selected the taxi- men and said their action will not be tolerated. Does she agree the taximen have been led up the hill by the Taoiseach, in his capacity as Duke of York, acting in response to those who are lobbying for them on the backbenches, such as Deputies Callely and Noel Ahern? Is that not the reason the taximen have been dropped in it and the Tanáiste's Minister has been left to hang out and defend the Government's position on his own?
The deregulation of taxis should have happened a long time ago. Until 1978 we did not regulate market entry. Regulation was brought in to improve the quality rather than to limit market access but it had the opposite effect. It is a Government decision. The Government is behind what the Minister, Deputy Molloy, did. He is right. He put the public interest and consumers first. I regret—
It took him long enough.
He was forced into it by the courts.
We would have wished to do it quite a long time ago.
It is not the Deputy's Priority Question. He should not interrupt.
It is not relevant to this question, but this power had been devolved to local authorities and they did not take appropriate action. The decision he made last year was based on what he thought was just and fair in the circumstances. That was struck down by the courts. What has happened now is right.
The time for this question has expired.
Briefly, I just—
The time has expired. We must proceed to Question No. 72.
Is the Minister aware of one of the lesser known disputes in the Eastern Regional Health Authority where clerical staff are in dispute and benefits cannot be accessed by members of the public? Is there any action the Minister proposes to take to facilitate them?
We are outside the time for question No. 71 and must proceed to Question No. 72.
I am aware of the dispute.
