Enda Kenny
Ceist:5 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach when he will next meet with the social partners; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16982/03]
Ceisteanna – Questions. - Social Partnership Process.
Enda Kenny
Ceist:6 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach the procedures in place in his Department to monitor the implementation of the new partnership agreement, Sustaining Progress; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16983/03]
Pat Rabbitte
Ceist:7 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach when the next quarterly review meeting of the social partners under the Sustaining Progress agreement will be held; the likely agenda for the meeting; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17503/03]
Trevor Sargent
Ceist:8 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach when the next meeting of the social partners will be held; the procedures in place to monitor the implementation of Sustaining Progress; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17662/03]
Pat Rabbitte
Ceist:9 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach if his attention has been drawn to concerns expressed by representatives of a number of community and voluntary organisations which did not sign up to Sustaining Progress, that they are being excluded from the social policy planning process; if guidelines have been issued to his Department's staff regarding contacts or discussions with these groups; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18245/03]
Enda Kenny
Ceist:10 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the implementation of the Sustaining Progress agreement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19533/03]
Enda Kenny
Ceist:11 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach when he will next meet with the social partners; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19534/03]
Enda Kenny
Ceist:12 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the recent activities of the National Implementation Body; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19536/03]
Enda Kenny
Ceist:13 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the recent work of the National Centre for Partnership and Performance; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19537/03]
Enda Kenny
Ceist:14 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the work of the National Economic Development Office; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19543/03]
Enda Kenny
Ceist:15 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach the proposed work of the National Economic and Social Council during 2003; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19549/03]
Enda Kenny
Ceist:16 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the meeting of the social partners on 18 July 2003; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19685/03]
Pat Rabbitte
Ceist:17 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the matters discussed and conclusions reached at the meeting held on 18 July 2003 with the social partners under the auspices of Sustaining Progress; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19712/03]
Pat Rabbitte
Ceist:18 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach when the next quarterly meeting with the social partners under the auspices of the Sustaining Progress agreement will be held; the likely agenda for the meeting; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19713/03]
Pat Rabbitte
Ceist:19 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his attendance at and address to, the biennial meeting of the ICTU on 4 July 2003. [19721/03]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Ceist:20 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on progress in the implementation of the Sustaining Progress agreement as it affects his Department. [20277/03]
Trevor Sargent
Ceist:21 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach the guidelines which have been established in his Department to maintain links with the many community and voluntary organisations which did not sign up to Sustaining Progress; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20406/03]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 5 to 21, inclusive, together.
As Deputies will recall, I reported to the House on 21 May last on the arrangements in place in my Department to monitor the implementation of the new agreement Sustaining Progress.
The inaugural plenary meeting, which I attended together with the Tánaiste and the Minister for Finance, took place in Dublin Castle on 18 July and included a presentation by the Department of Finance on the medium term economic outlook. I reminded the social partners of the need to maintain our focus on competitiveness, and of the Government's strong commitment to speed up the delivery of critical infrastructure. A detailed progress report on the implementation of Sustaining Progress was presented to the social partners at that meeting. A copy of the report has been laid in the Oireachtas Library. The next plenary meeting is scheduled to take place in Dublin Castle on 24 October, the agenda for which remains to be finalised.
My Department chairs the steering group, which has overall responsibility for the management of the implementation of the programme. The steering group held its fifth meeting on Monday last, 29 September.
In addition to the plenary meeting, of course, I also meet with representatives of individual social partner organisations on a regular basis. In this context, I addressed the biennial conference of ICTU on 4 July and outlined the Government's proposals to make state-owned lands available for affordable housing.
In regard to those community and voluntary organisations which have not ratified Sustaining Progress, Departments have been advised that there may be areas where the expertise of these organisations or their constituent members will be relevant to the policy making and implementation process. These organisations may be invited to participate on particular committees or working groups in the light of their particular expertise. This will, of course, be determined by the nature of the task or issue in question and is primarily a matter for each Department.
The interim pay agreement which forms part of Sustaining Progress provides for the continuation, with an enhanced role, of the National Implementation Body to ensure delivery of the industrial relations stability and peace provisions of the new agreement. The body, which is chaired by my Department and represents Government, IBEC, CIF and ICTU, meets as necessary to review ongoing disputes of major national importance. Meetings of the body also provide an opportunity for informal discussion of the broader issues relating to the social partnership process, from the employer and trade union perspectives. The NIB has met on a number of occasions since the ratification of Sustaining Progress in the context of industrial action impending or being taken across a range of employments.
As I explained in reply to a similar question from the Deputy on 29 January last, the National Economic and Social Development Office, NESDO, comprises the National Economic and Social Council, NESC; the National Economic and Social Forum, NESF; and the National Centre for Partnership and Performance, NCPP. Legislation underpinning the establishment of NESDO is currently at Second Stage and when enacted will place the three bodies on a statutory basis as part of the office.
The primary role of NESDO is to add value to the work of its constituent bodies by creating the conditions under which synergies can be realised, joint projects pursued and the potential for duplication minimised. The office promotes the development of a shared vision for realising these goals and encouraging the constituent bodies to maximise their efforts through collaborative policy development initiatives. In particular, the office performs its role by facilitating and pro moting complementary programmes of research, analysis and discussion by the NESC, NESF and NCPP; providing shared administration and support services for the three constituent bodies; and submitting to Government reports, recommendations or conclusions by a constituent body and arranging for their publication.
In regard to the National Economic and Social Council, a new council has recently been appointed by Government. The council will continue the work on housing policy begun by the previous council. The council will determine the remainder of its work programme for 2003 and 2004 as soon as possible. This will be done in co-operation with the other bodies in the National Economic and Social Development Office, the NESF and the NCPP.
Sustaining Progress indicates that the national centre for partnership and performance, which operates under the aegis of my Department, will play an increasing role in supporting the process of extending and deepening partnership and performance in the workplace. I have outlined the work programme of the national centre for partnership and performance in the House on a number of previous occasions and its most recent bulletin, setting out the ongoing activities of the centre in detail, was circulated to all Deputies in June of this year.
The NCPP is currently preparing for the inaugural session of a forum on the workplace of the future, which will take place in Dublin Castle on 6 and 7 October. The forum will develop a national dialogue on how workplaces in both the public and private sectors can adapt to competitive pressures, improve the delivery of services and respond to the changing needs of employees. The Government has asked the centre to consult and engage widely with employers and employees, managers, unions, labour market and organisational change experts and all those with an interest in shaping the workplace of the future.
To assist this process, I launched a consultative paper, prepared by the NCPP, entitled Modernising our Workplaces to Deliver Ireland's Competitive and Social Vision, in Government Buildings in July of this year. The paper, which has been circulated to a wide range of organisations and is freely available on the NCPP website, invites those who wish to influence developments in relation to the workplace of the future to contribute their views, experiences and ideas and to provide the forum with a framework for discussion and responses.
To provide the forum with the detail necessary to inform these deliberations, the NCPP has also requested the Economic and Social Research Institute to carry out three separate surveys to ascertain the attitudes, experiences and expectations of more than 5,000 employees, all 572 public sector employers and more than 1,600 private sector employers.
That is a very long reply. Will the Taoiseach give me three examples of public service improvements which have been achieved or agreed in return for the benchmarking process to date? I remind the Taoiseach that on 19 July at Dublin Castle he said that in the current economic climate, the payment of benchmarking awards poses a challenge for the credibility of social partnership. Given that the economic climate in which we are operating has deteriorated since then, what has changed that the Government intends to make the awards without any visible evidence of improved efficiency or a better public service for which the taxpayer is paying?
I have outlined that it was negotiated with the public service unions on benchmarking that part of the agreement would be paid as part of a normal round and that the remaining parts would be paid on the basis of talks and discussions which are ongoing within the bodies and the various unions. There is no doubt that they were large amounts of money. The figure for 2003 is €522 million and it will be €775 million in 2004. In addition, the estimated costs of implementing the general round increases under Sustaining Progress is €538 million in 2004 and over €900 million in 2005.
In the discussions, which went on for some time, it was made absolutely clear to and was agreed by the social partners that there would have to be real reform in various areas and the process by which that was to take place was also agreed. Performance verification groups have been established in all areas by the various Civil Service Departments and agencies, including the Departments of Health and Children, Education and Science, Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. The groups have independent chairs and equal numbers of management, trade unions and independent members.
All the public service organisations must prepare action plans detailing the modernisation they will implement in their organisations in return for the payments provided for. In all these areas, questions to Ministers will show the long list of areas which is being discussed. The action plans must be accepted by the performance verification groups as being satisfactory. The groups will then decide, on the basis of the progress reports submitted to them, if the level of progress achieved warrants the payment of the relevant pay increases. It is important to note that payment of the increases provided is not automatic. The agreement provides that the real outputs are delivered before the wage increases are made. That is the way in which the discussions are proceeding.
In reply to the general question the Deputy asked, the last agreement and this one have seen progress in the area of changing technologies across the public service. I have been involved in the system for some time and, as Minister for Labour, I remember rows about moving away from typewriters, which seem ridiculous now. However, the staff have now agreed to move forward by accepting technology per se, which is one improvement.
Other improvements include longer opening hours in Departments and agencies than previously and there are far more flexible work practices. I am not saying everything is perfect or right, but Ministers have detailed lists of areas which must be discussed before these amounts can be paid. The reports back from my Cabinet colleagues is that these discussions are meaningful and the process is proving to be a worthwhile exercise. However, I cannot say where it will end up until those discussions are finished.
The Taoiseach did not reply to my question in regard to Labre Park.
The ICTU put a high premium on the question of the housing crisis and specific terms were included in the agreement for the Government to provide an additional 10,000 affordable houses. Is the Taoiseach satisfied that the Government will deliver on time and what progress has been made? What proportion of the 10,000 houses might be constructed on the three plots of land which were allocated for the purpose?
I promise Deputy Mitchell I will deal with the carry-over question he reminded me of. I know Labre Park well, although I am not aware of the details of the CE scheme, and I will mention it. There has been a range of educational projects across the Traveller community to assist parents and children which, to the best of my knowledge, included Labre Park. There were extensive arrangements for providing children with education and after school care as well as for assisting the adults. I will pass the CE scheme issue to my colleagues and make them aware of Deputy Mitchell's comments.
In reply to Deputy Rabbitte, the Government's response to the housing initiative is being pursued as a matter of urgency. It is a very important part of the programme on a number of fronts.
On the land issue, there are four sites, one in Kildare, one in Meath and two in Dublin. The title of the land is currently being transferred legally. The local authorities concerned are drawing up plans for the density of houses to be provided in these areas. Most importantly, the Government is working with the social partners to find precise terms under the initiative, including the eligibility criteria as to who will get these houses. It was designed for people who in the normal way would have been expected to buy their own house but because of market forces are not in that position. These discussions are currently taking place.
I would say to Deputy Rabbitte that within Government Departments and local authorities further land banks are being looked at to try to support further the initiative. I do not think the present sites will cater for the whole range of housing. Efforts are continuing to try to acquire more land.
When the Taoiseach refers to further land banks and the promise to provide 10,000 houses under Sustaining Progress, is that to be State land as suggested by the Irish Council for Social Housing at a plenary meeting recently? It suggested that State land should be provided. However, the local authorities are saying that in the next two years they can only envisage the prospect of 400 units of social housing being possible. Apart from his fine words, how will the Taoiseach deliver on the 10,000 houses promised? If this is not delivered, how can he expect other parties to the agreement to keep their side of the bargain as this is a crucial part of the agreement?
A brief supplementary from Deputy Ó Caoláin.
Is the Taoiseach aware of the deep disappointment among groups within the voluntary and community sector at the total inadequacy of Sustaining Progress? Is he aware that one of the organisations in the community and voluntary pillar of the partnership, the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, has stated that in the critical areas of social inclusion Sustaining Progress contains no real commitments, no targets, no timetables and no new resources? Finally, is he aware that the same body stated that when it challenged critical aspects of the plan members were clearly invited to walk out the door? How does the Taoiseach respond to this question? Surely this is unacceptable.
A final reply, Taoiseach.
In reply to Deputy Ó Caoláin, social and affordable housing programmes this year cost €1.7 billion. I would like to hear a proposal on how to obtain the remainder of the money. That is not small money by any means. There are approximately 13,000 houses included in the proposals, which is a substantial number. The initiatives taking place in local authorities under Part 5 and the proportion of schemes being drawn up by local authorities to provide affordable housing are very good. Affordable housing is expensive but it is still involving an enormous number of people.
Some 10,000 houses was the target set by the social partners. The Government indicated it would do all it could to provide as many houses as possible. We have already provided a considerable amount of State land. However, local authorities should also contribute and we are discussing with them how this can be done. There are several other initiatives which are considering capping development land and so on. Sites are being provided now. Discussions on the criteria are ongoing. Titles are being exchanged and we are trying to acquire additional land. An amount of work is taking place and the more we can do on the supply side the better. It appears that the number provided this year will be approximately 60,000.
Was the Society of St. Vincent de Paul being offered the door?
The Society of St. Vincent de Paul is an excellent organisation which tries to press its demands. The concept that members were asked to walk out is not true. Given the resources being put into social inclusion this year as opposed to five or ten years ago, that is not a fair comment.
That is not the impression they got.