I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 13, inclusive, together.
The National Economic and Social Council published a summary of the recommendations of its strategy report on 19 November and copies have been lodged in the Oireachtas Library. The report sets out an agreed approach to the economic and social contexts in which negotiations on a successor to the PPF should be set, the main challenges to be faced in the period ahead and the options or paths to be followed in tackling those challenges. I take this opportunity to commend those involved in the production of a high quality report that provides valuable guidance and direction on issues of major national importance.
Formal meetings such as the PPF plenary session in Dublin Castle on 31 October complement the meetings which I hold with representatives of the social partners on a regular basis. In this context, I met the Irish Congress of Trade Unions at its request on 20 November, along with my colleagues the Tánaiste and the Minister for Finance. The meeting provided an opportunity for an exchange of views on the social partnership process. I reiterated that it was important to recall that social partnership is a long-term process which has underpinned our progress over the past 15 years. The social partners have shared short, medium and long-term goals. The Government believes it is to the mutual benefit of the partners, particularly in a difficult environment, to seek to reach a common understanding of the problems and to develop jointly framed responses to them.
The ICTU identified a number of issues, such as housing, health, public transport and caring, as being of concern to it in the context of the Estimates for 2003. I emphasised that in formulating the Estimates for next year, the Government was guided by the need to ensure that the levels of public spending were consistent with actual and projected economic growth, which in turn affects revenue levels. During the growth period and continuing into this year, public expenditure rose sharply – the rate of increase in spending in 2001 and 2002 totals almost 40%. Much of this has gone into the expansion of services in recent years, particularly in the health and education sectors.
Capital investment by Government under the national development plan has also increased significantly. However, we must protect our hard-won economic gains by being prudent in the management of the public finances. We will not repeat the mistakes of the past in terms of excessive borrowing and high levels of taxation. The Government regards social partnership as an important contribution to the governance process in this country. However, as in the past, there are times when it is essential that Government takes hard decisions in the interest of achieving widely shared goals, even though they may be difficult for the social partners.
Deputy Sargent asked for my views on the implications of this meeting for discussions on the successor to the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness. As the Deputy will be aware, I formally launched the talks at the last PPF plenary meeting in Dublin Castle. Following on from this, a series of bilateral meetings is now well under way and, as with previous agreements, the proceedings are subject to normal confidentiality arrangements in order to protect the negotiating positions of all. However, each of the social partner pillars, as well as the Government side, has made clear on many occasions in the recent past its own priorities and concerns.
The programme for Government also indicated that the models of participation in the social partnership process would be reviewed, including an examination of ways of maximising the efficiency and effectiveness of the process and the potential contribution of the community and voluntary sectors. A number of organisations, including the Senior Citizens' Parliament, have applied for inclusion in the social partnership process. We are considering how we can achieve our objectives in the context of these applications and it is an inherent part of the process that any changes proposed will be discussed with the relevant social partner pillar. In this context, each applicant organisation has been asked to provide a formal statement of its case for inclusion in the social partnership process, and my Department is in contact with these organisations.
The Government remains fully committed to seeking an appropriate basis for a new agreement between all of the social partners. I believe that the NESC analysis is helpful in this regard. All of the parties are aware that any new agreement will have to take account of the uncertain economic climate over the past year or so. As NESC has indicated, we will have to agree a suitably flexible strategy which allows us to continue to tackle major national priorities such as health care, child care, education, equality, poverty, infrastructure and competitiveness in the context of our future economic performance as a nation.
In relation to the pay terms of any agreement, based on the exploratory contacts over recent days between Government, the employers and congress, I believe there is scope to agree a new deal. Both employers and unions have indicated a genuine willingness to enter serious and intensive negotiations to find a pay deal whose terms address their legitimate concerns about living standards, competitiveness and jobs. While any deal must address the needs of workers and employers in the private sector, similar concerns arise for Government, as an employer, and public servants. Any deal on pay will be reached in the context of commitments by employers, unions and Government in relation to the workplace environment and in the context of the wider strategy to tackle our shared economic and social priorities contained in the overall agreement.