A transport plan was launched yesterday after what we were told was 11 months of planning. I have a slim volume of it here. It consists of four speeches, three maps, two lists and one repackaged transport plan designed to get the Government's neck off the line.
Leaders’ Questions.
It mentions a spend of €34.4 billion.
The plan will cost €34.4 billion. Maps were produced that were virtually identical to those produced previously. A total of 35 of the 40 projects were announced previously. Every householder will be asked to pay €25,000 through taxes or road tolls but they were not given any detailed costings, evaluations of the key items or prioritisation of projects based on the rates of return. Why is the Government denying these types of details to the public, which must pay this money in the coming years? Any plan worth its salt would have them. Most of the previous plans originating from any Government source were not slim volumes of this nature or did not cost €34.4 billion but were substantial documents.
I suppose we must accept it on faith when Ministers tell us that detailed and due diligence has been paid to this plan and careful scrutiny has been carried out. Will the Taoiseach answer three questions on the plan under this heading? First, will he give an indication of when work on the Luas line to Lucan will start? Will the Taoiseach state how much will the metro cost? Will he also state which projects will be funded under public private partnership? If he has done the due diligence and the analysis he stated he has, those are not unreasonable questions on specific flagship projects within the plan.
Hear, hear.
I will not go into all the details of the plan.
Just three answers are required.
I emphasise that the Ministers for Transport and Finance, the Tánaiste and I yesterday outlined how the plan was put together and the fact all of the agencies and the Department costed the plan as per their normal contracting arrangements, based on what it would cost during the next ten years.
That will cause more concern.
If one examines 19 of the last 22 projects that have come in on time and budget, they include the Border Dundalk route, the Ashbourne bypass, the Edgeworthstown relief road, the Monaghan town bypass——
What does that have to do with it?
——the Kinnegad to Kilbeggan route, the Loughrea bypass, the Naas road upgrade——
(Interruptions).
——the Fermoy to Watergrasshill road, the Mitchelstown relief road, the Bundoran to Ballyshannon bypass, the Ennis bypass, the Castleisland to Abbeyfeale road, and developments in Farranfore, Kinsale and Enniscorthy. They have all been on time and on budget. Based on the procedures operated——
None of them is in Dublin.
Allow the Taoiseach to speak without interruption.
They have all come in on time and on budget. I know the Opposition hates that.
What about the port tunnel?
Allow the Taoiseach to speak without interruption.
The same estimation procedure that brought in 19 of the last 22 projects on budget has been used. Projections for where projects will come in during each of the next ten years have been made, based on the estimates of CIE, Iarnród Éireann, Dublin Bus and the NRA. All of the organisations had a full input to this.
It contains nothing for Dublin.
I am trying to answer Deputy Bruton's question. Deputy Rabbitte will ask a question for the Deputy.
The Taoiseach will be in Dublin 15 on Monday.
Deputy Burton, the Taoiseach is entitled to the same courtesy as everybody else while answering a question. Deputy Bruton is quite capable of handling his own question and does not need the support of any other person in the House.
The Ceann Comhairle is generous.
Teacher's pet.
He asked three questions and did not get a reply to any of them.
After the sixth interruption may I reply to Deputy Bruton, who did not interrupt me once? Deputy Bruton asked a fair question on the detailed cost of each project. If the Department were to outline and detail all of the projects and the cost estimate that CIE and other organisations and agencies had for each project, it would make that information available commercially to everyone who tenders. Deputy Bruton would accept that would be entirely wrong. On each project, the agencies and the Department have individually and collectively given estimates to the Department of Finance. The same processes, including the revised issue regarding value for money requested by the Department of Finance, are dealt with in these projects.
Individual projects, such as the Luas from Lucan to the city centre, are listed in the one page report on when projects will be out. For years the agencies had an annual capital programme but were not able to procure the staff or organisation to create a team to deal with projects on a year by year basis. While over the past six or seven years we have made a major move toward producing proper infrastructure, the full list of projects of which is impressive, it is important for the agencies and the country that we systematically analyse all the projects to see what is necessary and put them in a detailed format. That answers the question.
With regard to questions asked on due diligence, the Minister outlined in a statement yesterday the criteria he took into account. It is not necessary for me to do so. I am sure the Minister will do it again if he is asked.
The Taoiseach's answer is an elaborate sham. We know the National Roads Authority published what it projected various projects would cost time and again. That did not result in commercial folly. It resulted in finding that many of those projects ran massively over cost and embarrassed the Government. The Government is not willing to commit itself to any costing. The Taoiseach has not done due diligence on this. If he had, he could tell me what the metro will cost, which projects will be PPP and when the Luas line to Lucan will start, none of which is in the plan.
It is a State secret.
Let us be honest. The national development plan was published in 2000. It was to cost €8 billion. Twelve months before the end of that plan, we see that half of the projects will not be completed on time and the cost will be three times what was originally stated. The public is asking how can it have more confidence in this plan than in the previous one, when the Government and the Taoiseach are not willing to give any open evaluation or costing to justify the cost of €25,000 per household and show it will yield value for money.
The truth is that every time a difficult issue arises, the Taoiseach and his Government produces another plan. Deputy Martin produced a health plan to end waiting lists. Where did it get us? Deputy Cullen's electoral voting plan is rusting in warehouses. A computing plan for the health service is lying abandoned because it cannot compute.
What about decentralisation?
Deputy McGinley mentioned decentralisation. We now find that less than 5% of the jobs to be moved through decentralisation will be moved within the schedule of the three year plan. The Taoiseach described it as an issue of essential political commitment on which Ministers would be judged. On all of these issues the Taoiseach looks for a card to get him out of jail. Like many of the great socialists before him who produced plans such as the great leap forward, spurious five year plans have been produced to get away from the fact the public does not want plans, it wants delivery. That is the acid test on which this Government fails.
Yesterday the Labour Party produced a chronicle of the wasted money that could have had an impact on many critical services. That is where the Taoiseach fails and this programme does not provide the answers to key questions to which the public has a right.
Hear, hear.
I refer the Deputy to the costing criteria set out yesterday by the Minister for Finance. I do not accept any of the points made by the Deputy. The national plan produced 185 km of motorway, 385 km of dual carriageway and bypasses in approximately 20 towns throughout the country. We spent €1,370 million on roads this year alone. I can outline all of the contracts if necessary. It includes work on doubling Exchequer support for CIE, new buses for Dublin Bus, new buses for Iarnród Éireann——
Rail carriages for Iarnród Éireann.
——new rail carriages for Iarnród Éireann and putting the Luas on the streets. When the Opposition had an opportunity, it announced the Luas but did not provide funding for it. To announce the Luas, put no money in the kitty and leave it for us was an intelligent plan. Its entire transport plan was approximately €250 million per year, which would never have got us to where we are.
Mary O'Rourke was the Minister then.
We invested greatly across a range of areas through the national development plan, the results of which can be seen throughout the country. It is true that items in the national development plan are not completed. Those items are included in this plan because we want to see the intercity rail routes completed. We put together a coherent plan based on the best professionalism of all the statutory agencies working with the Department of Transport which we never had.
Do not forget about the consultants.
Now the agencies are delivering because they have money and the economy is good. As one of my colleagues said yesterday, the Government is not into wasting money by doubling the national debt or spending money——
(Interruptions).
Allow the Taoiseach without interruption.
The great success of the parties opposite——
(Interruptions).
——was they spent practically all our resources. About 28% or 29% of the entire resources of the country was used to service the national debt. Deputy Burton knows because she was appalled at that.
(Interruptions).
Allow the Taoiseach, please.
Now we are able to have plans and put in resources. Those opposite had practically bankrupted the country. This Government is doing constructive things.
Yesterday I saw the senior members of the Labour Party driving a bus around town; it was not much of a bus, being about 20 years old and it would not have carried many of the public.
It is the only new bus.
They were horrified to see that a plan exists because they used to talk about doing something about Tallaght.
(Interruptions).
There will be proper transport and proper infrastructure and the IMF will not need to come to talk to the Minister for Finance.
(Interruptions).
Allow Deputy Rabbitte without interruption, please.
I have two questions for the Taoiseach. Does he recall the speech made by the Minister for Finance on 20 October? This was a 12 point plan the Minister for Finance announced to counteract the litany of waste, misspending and maladministration that had given rise to the controversies in the public domain before that. He announced a major initiative, a 12 point plan, point three of which was that there would be ex ante evaluations including economic cost benefit appraisal for all projects above €30 million.
I presume that as a result there has been that kind of ex ante evaluation and cost benefit analysis of yesterday’s plan. On the assumption the Taoiseach has complied with the Minister’s requirement, when will he put it into the public domain and publish it? For example, I would like to see the costings of the superior plan for a metro system to Dublin Airport, as compared to a spur line to the railway or DART system. I would like to hear the arguments that set out that the metro is the superior system. There are several other things I would like to see supported by the documents. When will the Taoiseach put these into the public domain and lay them before the House?
On the subject of the buses, the Minister announced he had provided for 20 additional buses. I asked for information from CIE because I have been looking for more than 20 new buses for my constituency and I was shocked by that statement which he repeated last night on "Prime Time". The information provided to me by CIE is as follows, that the national development programme, as referred to by the Taoiseach, between 2000 and 2006, provided for an additional 275 buses but only 93 were provided and none at all since 2001. I further find that CIE made a submission to the Department of Transport for 210 additional buses between 2006 and 2008 and not 20 buses. The Minister, Deputy Cullen, as brazen as you like, said last night in a speech to which the Taoiseach referred, "However I am conscious that Dublin has short term immediate needs for 20 additional buses in the coming weeks and I will immediately sanction these".
He will drive them too.
They were sanctioned last year; they were ordered last year; they are ready; they are 20 buses to replace 20 buses that are being retired by Dublin Bus.
The Deputy's time is concluded.
What credibility can the House give to a plan that on something as particular and specific as this, the Minister could have lied barefacedly through his teeth——
The Deputy must withdraw the words that the Minister lied. I ask him to withdraw them. I do not want confrontation on the floor of the House.
(Interruptions).
How does one describe what I have just described?
I ask the Deputy to withdraw the word "lie".
It is a blatant untruth.
I ask the Deputy to withdraw the word "lie".
I will say instead they are blatant untruths. How can the Taoiseach justify what the Minister said? How can he justify the fact that——
The Deputy will withdraw the word "lie".
I withdraw the word "lie".
The Taoiseach said they have provided so many buses for Iarnród Éireann. That must be where they are running — on the railway tracks — because they are not running in Dublin.
The Deputy's time is long since concluded.
Three new QBCs are ready to be rolled out by Dublin Bus, one in the Tallaght orbital route, one in south Clondalkin and one on the Rock Road. Dublin Bus is looking for buses for those three QBCs which cannot be rolled out because it does not have them and meanwhile the Taoiseach's Minister has the cheek to say that because 20 buses are being retired and 20 were ordered last year, he will immediately sanction 20 buses. This is the only thing he will sanction between now and the general election.
I ask the Deputy to give way to the Taoiseach.
This was a media event and a stunt and the Taoiseach is making a very bad job of defending it.
(Interruptions).
I will make three points for the information of the Deputy. He does not wish to listen. Before he saw any of the plan yesterday he decided to go out on a political campaign and a poor one at that.
The Taoiseach would never do such a thing.
When Luas was launched I remember the Deputy's party saying we would never see it in the lifetime of the next Dáil and now 20 million people——
That never happened.
I suggest the Deputy stops telling deliberate untruths.
The Chair will not tolerate interruptions when the Taoiseach is speaking on this question.
I was merely making what I regard as a fair point that the Labour Party said it would never see Luas in the lifetime of this Dáil but I remind them that this Dáil has a long way to go. Luas has been operating for a year.
That was said in the last Dáil.
I disagree; it was not.
It was.
No, it was not.
Deputy Burton will leave the House.
Deputy Burton should make up her mind whether she is a heckler or a politician.
The Luas has carried 20 million passengers so I doubt the credibility of the Labour Party to make any comments on this matter.
Deputy Rabbitte asked me three questions. This plan is the result of due diligence and the full costing of the agencies to enable the Department of Finance to properly cost it as a proper national plan. I hope this will be sufficient to deal with it over the years. As the Minister stated yesterday, there may be contingencies needed and other priorities might be decided upon. However, based on what is in this plan and based on the proper costings and on the criteria set down by the Minister for Finance, the first point has been dealt with.
On the subject of buses, Deputy Rabbitte has decided to jump on one issue to which the Minister referred yesterday and that is fair enough. I will list the figures for the House. In recent years, 862 new buses have been provided to Dublin Bus, 624 new buses to Bus Éireann——
Are those the fleet numbers?
The Minister stated yesterday there was a requirement this year for 20 additional buses; he was referring to the needs of the next few months. He then went on to give full details of the full requirements for buses over the next decade and this is contained in his speech. I am sure there is no need for me to read sections of his speech to the House.
(Interruptions).
The Taoiseach should give the speech to Deputy Martin because he will read it.
I will not read the full list of all the issues but as Deputy Rabbitte is of the view that none of these issues will be of great value to the Dublin area I will refer to the Dublin area. The metro north will go from St. Stephen's Green to Swords via Dublin Airport and is scheduled for completion in 2012. A new orbital metro west will shadow the M50 to the west and connect the Luas red line at Tallaght with metro north to Ballymun. A new Luas line will operate from Lucan to the city centre and there will be an extension of the Luas green line from Sandyford to Cherrywood. Those are the details of how it will link in. A railway interconnector will also be constructed while the electrification of the Kildare line——
That will not be complete until 2015.
None of the projects is set out in detail now. From an engineering point of view, not to mind a cost point of view, for planning reasons and to try to get co-operation with the agencies, we will not be able to deliver projects like these if we do not work on the basis of a prolonged period. The Government, based on the national development plan, the national spatial strategy and the best advice we have been able to muster, which has included working with people from South Africa, Australia and the United States in the course of the NDP, is trying to move satisfactorily from having very poor infrastructure to having very good infrastructure. We have done an enormous amount of work, which has been far ahead of our commitments.
Deputy Bruton mentioned the costs. We have spent more and delivered much more and have not completed all projects. In some cases we got stuck in planning——
They have not delivered new buses in Dublin.
——but the fact is we have set out a coherent way forward by working with professionals.
Consultants.
We have a consultant-led Government.
The transport plan is not about making a political point. The Government is not saying what we will have done by 2007 or 2012 but trying, over the next decade, to move infrastructure from the very good base to which we have brought it in a manner which is properly planned, costed and designed and to give people adequate time to get this right. If that approach is wrong, it is a sad day for the country. Rather than whinging about some broken bus somewhere, which is a ridiculous attitude, the Opposition should at least acknowledge that the plan involves proper planning and investment.
My constituents want to get to work by bus. Delivering a bus service is the simplest element of transport, yet the Government has failed to do so.
Deputy Ryan is not yet leader of his party. I ask him to resume his seat and show some respect for his leader.
I have never seen an elaborate programme announced by Government fall so flat on its face so quickly, and in all the time I have been opposite the Taoiseach in different positions, I have never seen him make such a poor defence of such an elaborate plan. I have a copy of a reply to a parliamentary question tabled by my colleague, Deputy Shortall. Dated 3 February 2005, it details the number of buses operating in Dublin in different years. The figures, which can be checked, show that the number of buses in Dublin in 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004, respectively, was 1,062. One can gather from this the number of new buses the Government has provided. Given that the Minister for Transport deliberately sought to misrepresent the figures on buses, what confidence can we have in him on any of the other aspects of the transport plan?
The Taoiseach seems to resent Deputies asking him to support the claims he made yesterday, which were purely aspirational and for which no supporting documents were provided. In a speech made on 20 October the Minister for Finance stated:
I believe it is appropriate to reduce the project value level to €30 million. This approach will include identification and carefully quantified analysis of all the relevant project costs and benefits, including indirect costs as well as the identification of any risks of cost escalation.
The speech is only a couple of weeks old.
The panic is on.
That was the new initiative and the Government appears to have spurned it already. I simply asked the Taoiseach to lay the results of the evaluation before the House. The reason he did not indicate that he would do so was that no such evaluation has been done.
There is little point in referring to a protest which we — properly — organised when the trams or carriages were delivered during Senator O'Rourke's time as Minister for Public Enterprise when she was trying to make up her mind on whether to go underground or overground. The issue we were protesting against was the delay and serious cost overrun for the project. Since then, the Government has built five kilometres of tunnel in a project which has overshot by two years and €340 million. The Taoiseach now asks the House to believe the Government will build tunnels from Ballymun to Tallaght and the inner city to the airport. What kind of cloud cuckoo land does he believe the rest of us join him in? This only backs up the campaign we launched yesterday which the Taoiseach so resented.
The Government Front Bench comprises a shower of wasters who will not come in to the House to support the Taoiseach's grand plan. They misrepresent facts and expect us to buy a pig in a poke. The transport plan is purely a media event to try to get out of the hole in which the Government finds itself and the more it digs, the deeper the hole becomes, although it is not yet big enough to build a metro.
It is time for the Government to go underground.
The Government is in panic mode.
As usual, I will ignore the political points made very poorly by Deputy Rabbitte.
In that case, I would not like to see Deputy Rabbitte on form.
I have seen him involved in several different parties and activities.
The Taoiseach could not answer any of the questions put by any of the parties in question.
If Deputy Rabbitte would like me to give all the details of the plan in two or three minutes, he knows I cannot do so. We outlined the details yesterday. I repeat the point that the Department of Transport in the work leading up to the plan with all the relevant agencies looked in detail at the proposals we believed it would be necessary to deal with as a priority. We did this on every single project. As I said, it would be commercial nonsense to indicate the exact figure on costs for every project. However, the Department and the relevant agencies, based on what they have been doing for a number of years, have built up what they require to undertake this plan.
Now that we have clearance on the precise elements of the plan, all the necessary detailed planning and development work as well as the implementation of the constituent programmes will have to move ahead in the timeframes outlined. The Department will establish a monitoring group under its chairmanship for the purpose of overseeing the implementation of what is a very elaborate plan to bring the infrastructure of this country up to scale. It obviously irks people that we have done this.
The work was done not by politicians but by the best engineers available to us who, day in day out, are delivering successfully, whether it is the rail safety plan, the opening of Luas or the construction of the port tunnel, a hugely successful operation and only the second tunnel of its kind in Ireland. I have already given the figures on buses, rail——
The figures are wrong.
They do not stand up.
I will give the relevant figure again. The official figure on what has been produced in terms of buses in this country is 1,550 between——
We want figures on additional buses, not new ones.
This country, which the Opposition is so happy to knock, has one of the most modern fleets of buses in Europe because the Government has replaced them. It is a much more modern fleet of buses.
When was the Taoiseach last on a bus?
Allow the Taoiseach to continue without interruption.
As I outlined, we have successfully introduced a very good national development plan. It is not the case, as one Deputy indicated, that we have not completed projects. The opening of 185 km of motorway, including 66 km this year, ranks very highly by international standards. We have built a massive 385 km of new dual carriageway and single carriageway in recent years and have bypasses in many parts of the country. A total of €1.37 billion was spent doing this. Exchequer funding for CIE doubled, 1,550 buses were delivered, as were intercity carriages and new rail cars. In addition, we had the success of Luas.
Unfortunately, all we have seen today is the usual old begrudgery of people who hate to see progress.
We hate to see a con job.
The Government had its chance.
I am proud of this land and what we are achieving. It is a pity that so far not one member of the Opposition has been able to accept the benefit of what CIE, the National Roads Authority and all the other transport bodies are successfully doing to improve the transport system. People outside the House want to see this plan realised. The Government is doing this. We will not go back to using our money to pay the national debt accumulated by an irresponsible Government which doubled debt in a four-year period. That is the reason we are not going back.
The Taoiseach is rewriting history.
Before Deputy Ó Caoláin commences, perhaps I might point out that seven minutes are allowed for each leader's question. The last question took 18 and a half minutes, and I ask that Members co-operate.
Does the Taoiseach recognise that the social partnership process is falling asunder? Does he realise there can be no meaning or future for it if the management of Irish Ferries gets away with dumping Irish-based workers and hiring vulnerable people who will be exploited through lower wages and poorer conditions? Is he aware that Irish workers in the public and private sectors are deeply concerned at the development and that they express that concern daily? The Taoiseach has condemned the Irish Ferries management, but what will his Government do about it?
Is he aware that a draft EU directive on ferry services was proposed by the European Commission but withdrawn in August 2004 because agreement could not be reached on the final text at the Council of Ministers? To his credit, a Fianna Fáil MEP, Mr. Liam Aylward, asked the Commission if it intended again to propose a directive on staffing conditions for ferry services operating not only between EU member states but linking such states with other destinations. Does Mr. Aylward's question reflect Government policy, and will the Government support and lobby for the reintroduction of such a draft directive so that social dumping on ferries and the setting of the lowest labour standards in order to exploit workers further can be combatted and ended?
The Deputy's two minutes are concluded.
On the same theme, this morning I met representatives of the Communication Workers' Union. Does the Taoiseach not also recognise that, in An Post's refusal to pay increases due under Sustaining Progress, its management is also contributing to the further erosion of confidence? The future of social partnership has seriously been called into question. What is the Taoiseach's view of IBEC's support for An Post management, and what will he do? Will he call on An Post to pay the due increases to its 8,500 workers——
The Deputy's time is concluded.
——recognising that only by doing that can we reach a situation where we can hang on to the Sustaining Progress agreement? All the issues that An Post wants to bring to the table can then be substantively addressed by the CWU on behalf of its membership.
I have answered the Irish Ferries point three weeks in a row, but I will briefly recap by saying that the issue is before the Labour Court. As Deputy Ó Caoláin stated, we have examined our legislation at both European and national level. Last week Deputy Rabbitte also made some proposals in this regard. We must see if there is a way of dealing with ships registered offshore that endeavour to use this country but keep their staff totally outside its jurisdiction. I have been advised to date that no law can do that. There is no relevant European law, and even if there were one, many of the flags of convenience linked to other places would remain outside of European Union law and the legal difficulties in trying to implement this would create substantial difficulties.
I met Irish Ferries management at the beginning of last week. I outlined the difficulty that its actions have caused. It made all its arguments to me, but I do not accept that the procedures it used are valid. I know it argues that nearly all its workers have applied for redundancy. It wishes to deal with that, but it has created difficulties in the wider trade union movement. It is a bad practice to remove Irish jobs in order for others to come in on lower rates. I have heard arguments in that regard outside the House, but I still do not agree with it and I have made my position very clear. I have agreed to work with the unions to examine its legality. The Minister has already done so and set out a detailed case to the unions. Regarding IBEC agreeing with the employers, it is the employers' organisation. Since it tends to agree with employers, that does not surprise me.
On the issue of An Post, the membership of the CWU has voted for strike action on the basis of the non-payment of Sustaining Progress increases. The union has granted the company 14 days before industrial action. That will expire on Friday. Talks are ongoing today to see what, if anything, might be done to deal with that. I do not want to say anything about them, other than to say that I naturally hope that they facilitate an acceptable agreement.
On the pay issue the Deputy raised, the membership of the CWU voted for action, but it is not clear what form that action might take. At the request of the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Noel Dempsey, the implementation body will facilitate today's talks between the two sides to find a resolution in the context of the Labour Court recommendation to which I referred last week. The AHCPS, the PSEU and the CPSU have referred the non-union payment of Sustaining Progress to the Labour Court for determination. The Labour Court decided that members of the AHCPS and CPSU have agreed and implemented change agreements and on that basis are entitled to Sustaining Progress increases as set out in the Labour Court recommendations issued last summer.
That means that Sustaining Progress payments due this year and next will be paid from the due dates. That due in 2003 and 2004, which amounts to 5%, was paid to An Post employees and pensioners from 1 January 2005 on foot of the assessor's report, and retrospective payments due will be considered in the context of the company's financial situation. The recommendation made regarding the PSEU is that, where it agrees and implements changes to work practices, Sustaining Progress will be paid on the same basis as to members of other unions.
An Post has accepted the Labour Court recommendation and stated that pensioner members of the AHCPS, CPSU and PSEU will also receive payments under Sustaining Progress. As I understand it, An Post is prepared to continue negotiations on that basis.
I have outlined the position in full regarding all the unions involved. Needless to say, I hope the discussions on the remaining parts will be successful.
Does the Taoiseach not recognise that his response to IBEC's backing for the actions of Irish Ferries management will only create greater concern among workers in the public and private sectors? The notion is implied in his response that it is normal and acceptable from an employer's perspective, but it is no such thing; it is abnormal and must be addressed. If the Taoiseach is not prepared to grapple with IBEC, recognising his special responsibility for the partnership process, will he not now intervene with An Post to modify its intransigent position and allow for payment to workers to proceed under the Sustaining Progress agreement? Will he help avoid——
The Deputy's time is concluded.
——a postal strike, with all its serious consequences for the economy? Does the Taoiseach know that tomorrow thousands of Irish workers will march on this House in a further cry regarding their concerns about the future of partnership and the serious consequences of the actions of Irish Ferries management of which I have given account? In conclusion——
The Deputy's time is concluded.
——will the Taoiseach take this matter further? Will it be raised at EU level and beyond so that the abuses by Irish Ferries management can be stamped out and no other employer, Irish or otherwise, seeks to adopt such a threatening and serious approach, which can only damage the Irish economy?
I do not believe I misheard Deputy Ó Caoláin, but if I did, I apologise. The question he asked was about IBEC in the context of An Post and I said that was normal practice.
No, it was in the context of Irish Ferries, and I put it clearly.
I will not argue, but I thought the Deputy said the opposite. As regards Irish Ferries, I am on record to the effect that I thought that was an ill-advised position for IBEC to take. In fairness to the director general of IBEC, he changed the confederation's position on that about three or four weeks ago, which I certainly appreciated. I believe IBEC should not have taken the line it did. I answered as regards what it said about An Post, because it is the employers' organisation, rather than about Irish Ferries.
I have outlined the situation. It is not for me to be directly involved in any of these disputes. That is not the practice and it is not the correct or appropriate procedure. I have just outlined the factual position. The industrial relations machinery, including the Labour Court, the Labour Relations Commission, the conciliation councils and the registered trade agreements as well as the National Implementation Body, NIB, should be used to resolve such matters. I have indicated strongly that these are issues I should like to see resolved and will not change. The Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Dempsey, has been enormously helpful in trying to resolve these issues and in trying to be fair.
He has backed An Post——
Every Minister involved in such disputes is attacked by both sides, and the Minister, Deputy Dempsey's position is the same. He has been working hard to try to find resolutions for the issues involved and will continue to do so.