Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Tuesday, 24 Apr 2012

Other Questions

Public Service Staff

Ceisteanna (6)

John Browne

Ceist:

112Deputy John Browne asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he is satisfied with the management of retirements from the public sector that took place up to the end of February 2012; the number of retirements he expects between now and the end of 2012; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20261/12]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí ó Béal (11 píosaí cainte)

I am pleased to report to the House that the management of retirements from the public sector at the ending of the "grace period" on the 29th of February last was broadly successful. This is not to say that there were not problems in some locations in the public service, rather that any problems that arose were resolved locally as is right and proper.

Returns from the various sectors indicate that approximately 8,500 public servants will retire this year. Latest reports from the various sectors within the public service indicate that some 8,000 retired in the first two months of the year. The staffing number returns for the end of the first quarter in 2012 are being received by my Department at present from across all the sectors. These will be published on my Department's website in the usual manner and will show the updated and confirmed position at that point.

There was a degree of hype in the run-up to the end of February. One broadcaster asked me to be on stand-by to meet the Y2K level of catastrophe that was supposed to happen but did not. I am glad that there were no significant issues. I pay tribute to local managers and workers across the public service who managed that significant downsizing, which would normally represent a year's out-take, in two months.

I thank the Minister for the information where he indicated that 8,000 have retired up to the end of February and he expects possibly another 500 to leave over the subsequent ten months up to the end of the year. Does that meet his original target as I thought there was a figure of closer to 9,000? How many new people will be recruited to fill the vacancies created by the 8,500 who have retired or will be retiring? The obvious area is teaching. A number of those retiring are teachers and many of them must be replaced - there is no question about that. In how many cases has the Minister given approval for the recruitment embargo to be lifted? I know the HSE got a budget to recruit additional staff in the primary care and mental health areas. It was given a budget to do so and once it does not exceed that budget it does not need to go back to the Minister for supplementary approval on a post-by-post basis.

I would be happy to give a detailed briefing to the Deputy in that regard. We will have to move on in a few minutes, so I probably will not be able to give the Deputy a comprehensive answer. However, I will give the specifics. The announcement I made with regard to public sector numbers was that by 2015 numbers would have reduced to 282,500. The outturn figure for the end of last year was 296,872, and this year's figure under the employment control framework is 294,401. That is, in ballpark figures, where we started, where we are going and where we are now. It is conservative to suggest an outflow figure of 8,500 for this year; that is the figure I have been given. The current estimated figure for the first two months, which might change by one or two, is 8,168, so we will exceed the figure of 8,500. However, it is my intention, as I have indicated, to allow some staff back in key pressure areas. As the Deputy has seen, for example, the Army is currently recruiting in an attempt to get back to its complement of 9,500, and there are other sectors under pressure in which we need to bring specific skills back. Most teachers, because of the pupil-teacher ratio, are being replaced.

The Minister mentioned some time ago that the next set of retirements would be targeted.

He might explain what he means by that. Will retirement be made available for specific grades while other grades are excluded, or will it apply to a certain coterie of employees with X number of years' service?

That is a good question. Many people did not understand - although obviously those in the House did - the nature of the exit at the end of February. Put simply, those who were coming up to retirement did a calculation in which they compared their expected retirement pensions and lump sums with the amount that would be available at the end of the grace period and decided, based on this, whether it was in their interest to leave. Many people left, but they were mostly people who were on the edge of retirement - within a year or two or within a few months of retirement.

We had no control over who left in February, and we lost some people a year or two early whom we would have preferred to hold on to for a couple more years. If there is to be more downsizing it will be on a targeted basis, applying to areas in which we clearly have too many people whom we cannot redeploy within the terms of the Croke Park agreement. We have made no decisions on that, but I will keep the Deputy informed.

I could not let what the Minister said go. He struck almost a smug note when he said there were concerns about the large exodus from the public sector and its consequences. He has acknowledged the good work of public servants, which is correct, but could he also acknowledge the fact that public services are under significant pressure? It would be entirely misleading for us to have a false debate in the House-----

Deputy, we are not having a debate. It is Question Time.

-----implying that the exodus had no consequences in terms of service provision. I ask the Minister at least to acknowledge that.

I readily acknowledge it. If there was any smugness about my statement it certainly was not intended. I was anxious that things would go smoothly during that period, and I pay public tribute to those who ensured it did, that is, local managers across every sector and local workers who increased productivity and flexibility to ensure the impact on front line services was minimised. Of course there were pressure points, but they were addressed locally, and I commend people on doing so.

We are in the process of downsizing the public service, of doing more with less. We have had enormous gains in flexibility. The Deputy might join with me in congratulating those who have embraced the Croke Park process and who have proven that we can achieve an awful lot more with co-operation than with coercion. I am proud of the increases in flexibility that have been achieved across virtually every sector of the public service through the Croke Park agreement.

Expenditure Reviews

Ceisteanna (7)

Bernard J. Durkan

Ceist:

113Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he is satisfied that the full extent of public expenditure saving and reform envisaged in the context of the Memorandum of Understanding have been achieved to date; the area or areas that have so far performed best in this regard; those deemed to require improvement; if targets have been exceeded in any areas; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20253/12]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí ó Béal (1 píosaí cainte)

The Government is making good progress on achieving all its targets and priorities, as articulated in the Government programme. We are bringing public expenditure back to a sustainable level and driving forward the public service reform agenda to ensure that efficiencies and reformed work practices play a full part in contributing to the overall budgetary consolidation effort.

This Government's approach has been set out in the comprehensive expenditure report 2012-14, published on 5 December last; the capital infrastructure plan published on 10 November 2011; the implementation body publication of the public service agreement progress report on 17 November 2011; and the public service reform plan also published on 17 November 2011.

The public service reform plan published last November outlines the priority actions and timeframes for reform. Implementation of the reform plan is being overseen by the reform and delivery office established within my Department, which is co-ordinating the various reform initiatives. Good progress is being made in the implementation of the reform plan. For example, we are rolling out the public service card for government services, expanding e -government through the recently published e-government strategy, increasing the use of shared services and aggregated procurement under the supervision of my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, who is sitting beside me, and we are rationalising the number of Government bodies to achieve efficiency savings.

Ireland is living up to its end of the bargain by delivering on all the conditions and targets set out in the EU-IMF programme by the required deadlines. As I am sure the Deputy is aware, the sixth quarterly review is currently taking place. It would be premature at this stage to comment on the possible outcome of these discussions but I am satisfied that Ireland is meeting all the conditions and targets of our programme, including all reform and expenditure targets. The Government has repeatedly affirmed its commitment to meeting the targets agreed with our European and IMF partners.

National Monuments

Ceisteanna (8)

Willie O'Dea

Ceist:

114Deputy Willie O’Dea asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the number of projects in relation to preservation of national monuments that will be undertaken in 2012; the associated costs; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20291/12]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí ó Béal (3 píosaí cainte)

The Office of Public Works is responsible for the conservation, care and maintenance of approximately 780 national monuments, which are in State ownership or guardianship. The conservation and presentation of these monuments involves a mixture of activities including major and minor conservation projects, works to facilitate or improve the presentation and interpretation of sites and ongoing maintenance.

Twenty-one major projects, each one estimated to cost in excess of €100,000, involving conservation works in regard to the preservation of national monuments, will be undertaken in 2012. Examples of these projects include work at Ennis Friary, Nenagh Castle, Askeaton Castle and Ormonde Castle. A full list of major projects, including the programmed expenditure, can be provided to the Deputy.

OPW-managed sites attract 3.5 million visitors per annum. In order to enhance the visitor experience, a range of services are provided including interpretative centres, parking facilities, improved universal access, flood-lighting and interpretive panels. Minor works and ongoing routine maintenance will continue during 2012. These are part and parcel of the ongoing annual programme. The budget allocation for the maintenance of national monuments in 2012 is €14.73 million. The visitor services budget, which covers the cost of providing guide services at 69 individual national monuments, is approximately €7.4 million this year.

I thank the Minister of State for the information provided to date. I would welcome the full list he stated could be provided. He noted there were guides at 69 sites throughout the country. At how many of these do people have to pay to enter? The Minister of State might give the House that information. I agree with him there is great tourism value and that is why I highlighted this issue. I encourage him to continue in this area with whatever expenditure is possible. I draw his attention specifically to the Rock of Dunamaise in County Laois. I saw in my local paper that the Minister of State may have visited this site last year. He might speak about the structures-at-risk fund which concerns protected structures that may not be national monuments. I am not sure which Department disburses that fund, the Minister of State's Department or the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht. There are also grants through the Heritage Council. Between what the Minister of State is spending, the structures-at-risk fund that is given out through local authorities from whichever of the two Departments, and the Heritage Council grant, can the Minister of State return with a figure for the global spend? He may not have that information today. There are sums going here and there and it would be very useful to ensure there is full rationalisation.

I am pleased to inform the Deputy that the famous cross of Durrow, a fantastic artefact in his constituency, will again be on full public view from next Monday. It has been transferred from the graveyard into the wonderful church in Durrow. That is an example of the ongoing conservation work carried out by the Office of Public Works. At 50 of the 69 sites, we pay in. One of the initiatives I launched is the first free Wednesday every month. It has been an enormous success and has increased the number of people attending these sites all over the country by 50% on the Wednesdays in question. We will look at how we can extend the initiative this year.

Grants to the Heritage Council and others are provided by other Departments. Our responsibility is for the 7,500 monuments, of which 69 are guided, and all historic properties, such as Kilmainham, Farmleigh and Dublin Castle. In a tight budgetary environment, we are attempting to maximise our spend. Later this month and over the summer we will launch an important voluntary participation programme, whereby we encourage new partnerships between local communities and the Office of Public Works to help us run and present these fantastic sites. It will be similar to the model used by English Heritage. There is great potential in asking local volunteers to help us in the preservation of these sites.

Semi-State Bodies

Ceisteanna (9)

Seán Crowe

Ceist:

115Deputy Seán Crowe asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if, he intends to review the payments and allowances paid to Stage agency chief executive officers; the changes, if any, he plans to make to these payments and allowances; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20297/12]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí ó Béal (3 píosaí cainte)

In June, 2011 the Government took two significant steps on the payment arrangements of CEOs in commercial State bodies. First, we introduced a general pay ceiling of €250,000 per annum in the case of newly appointed CEOs in commercial State companies, along with reductions to similar appointees in such companies with lesser pay ceiling levels. Second, we sought voluntary reductions in the remuneration levels of serving CEOs with salaries in excess of €250,000 per annum. The sole exception is in respect of the newly appointed CEOs is in the ESB, for whom a salary was approved which is proportionate to the reductions imposed generally.

The position in respect of already serving CEOs is that for contractual reasons the imposition of reduced salary rates could not be unilaterally proceeded with by Government. However, incumbent CEOs in the commercial State companies with a salary in excess of the general salary ceiling of €250,000 per annum were requested to make a voluntary waiver of salary of 15%, or to waive a lesser amount if the application of the full 15% reduction would have brought their salary below the €250,000 salary ceiling. All of the relevant incumbent CEOs whose salaries were in excess of €250,000 per annum agreed to the application of the waivers.

The current system of performance-related award schemes for the CEOs of commercial State companies is being reviewed in conjunction with the relevant overseeing Departments in order to consider whether it would be appropriate to amend the operation of these schemes and to provide for more direct input and oversight by Ministers.

With regard to CEOs of non-commercial State agencies, in June 2011 the Government introduced a general pay ceiling of €200,000 per annum for future appointments in the public service. This ceiling continues to apply. The policy could not, for contractual reasons, be applied to incumbents. A voluntary waiver of salary of 15%, or the ceiling of €200,000, was requested. Only a small number of such bodies continue, as they are legally entitled to do, to operate performance-related award schemes for their CEOs. The remuneration of CEOs in both the commercial and non-commercial State sectors has undergone significant reductions. Future policy developments on the determination of remuneration at the level of CEO will require ongoing consideration in the light of the changes that have already been introduced.

The question was specifically related to State agencies, not commercial ones. I am working on the supposition that premium payments and allowances made to State agencies' CEOs are under review. Can the Minister tell us the total bill to the Exchequer in respect of payments to CEOs of State agencies? I am not referring to commercial bodies.

Will the pay ceiling apply to the CEO of the new water utility?

I am reviewing premium pay and performance-related pay and I do not have a closed mind. For some, the idea of performance-related pay or bonuses is entirely acceptable in the private sphere but unacceptable in the public sphere. I do not subscribe to that idea. It is not appropriate in the Civil Service but there may be some commercial companies where performance-related pay is worth examining. In that context, I am reviewing performance-related pay generally.

I can provide the Deputy with the pay rates that currently apply to every State agency in written form. The pay rate for the new chief executive of Irish Water has not been determined but, as of now, it will sit under the stewardship of the infrastructure in place of Bord Gáis Éireann.

Croke Park Agreement

Ceisteanna (10, 11)

Seamus Kirk

Ceist:

116Deputy Seamus Kirk asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the timetable he envisages for the next review of the Croke Park Agreement; if the format and information content in the Implementation Body Review Report will be improved; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20272/12]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Micheál Martin

Ceist:

141Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he has attended any meetings in relation to the implementation of the Croke Park Agreement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19790/12]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí ó Béal (5 píosaí cainte)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 116 and 141 together. Under Paragraph 1.16 of the Public Service Agreement 2010-2014, the implementation body is required to carry out an annual review of the sustainable savings generated from the implementation of the agreement and of the agreements in each sector. The body carried out its first such review last year and published a detailed first annual report last June. The period under review related on that occasion to the first year of operation of the agreement - 1 April 2010 to the end of March 2011.

The body's report was comprehensive and robust, providing a detailed account of the sustainable savings that had been achieved under the agreement to date. It is worth recalling that the report estimated sustainable pay bill savings in the order of €289 million were achieved in the first year. In addition, examples were provided of administrative efficiency or non-pay related savings of some €308 million. Furthermore, the report outlined in some detail the progress being achieved on implementing the change and reform agendas as set out in the action plans in place in each sector. The body also provided a frank assessment of the progress made in the first year, concluding that "solid and measurable" progress was being made during the implementation year plan.

The second annual review of the agreement by the body is currently under way and, as before, this review will examine the extent of savings and reform that have been achieved under the framework of the agreement in its second year. The relevant review period is 1 April 2011 to 31 March 2012. The exact structure and content of the implementation body's report arising from this review is a matter for the body itself under its independent chair. I look forward to receiving the report and I expect it will be published in June 2012. I take a very close interest in the implementation of the public service agreement. I meet with members of the implementation body, including meeting them with the Taoiseach, and am due to do so again shortly. It is also worth emphasising that officials in my Department are integrally involved in overseeing implementation of the agreement in their capacity as members of the implementation body. The secretariat to the body is also provided by my Department.

I ask the Minister to take up the issue of the Croke Park agreement in subsequent meetings. I am being kind when I described the format and content of the original annual report as unsatisfactory. We let it go but only two sentences mentioned the saving of €300 million. At the meeting of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform, we told Mr. Fitzpatrick that we want to see savings broken down by Department. We want to see the detail because it is not good enough in the public interest to give an overall figure. Perhaps the Minister can give us the method by which he will assess the report. It is possible that the report will be a good one. However, can the Minister envisage a situation where he says it is unsatisfactory if it is so?

Many of the savings have nothing to do with the Croke Park agreement. The reduction in public service numbers was changed by the incoming Government, of which Deputy Howlin is a member, when it took office last year. I would say the savings were as a result of a Government decision rather than as a result of the implementation of the Croke Park agreement. Therefore, I ask the Minister to explain which savings come under the Croke Park deal and which savings were achieved in the public service outside of the Croke Park deal. Somehow or other, these are always aggregated as being part of the Croke Park deal. Will the Minister tell us which category of savings did not come under the deal?

I heard the Deputy's criticism of the format of the first annual report last year and I take note of it. I know that Mr. Fitzpatrick met the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform and I suppose that point was made to him there. We look forward to seeing the nature and content of the next report and I note what Deputy Fleming has said.

I do not accept the point that some of the savings that are not encompassed by the Croke Park agreement are calculated within it. Although as an incoming Government we have revised the numbers reduction targets upwards, all of that had to be done within the existing public service. It was the capacity of the Croke Park deal to allow redeployment to deal with stress points that made the additional downsizing possible. Therefore, I would not say that was a Government decision that had nothing to do with the Croke Park agreement. The entirety of the framework that gives us flexibilities to operate public services in a new and imaginative way, to move people, to have shared services and to do all of the things in our reform agenda are attributable to the Croke Park deal.

We had the implementation body for the Croke Park agreement before the Committee of Public Accounts recently and I found it interesting that there were no members of the private sector on that body. What is the Minister's view on that? Does he think it necessary to have someone from the private sector or someone not directly affected by the outcomes and the work of the implementation body appointed to it? Otherwise, we cannot avoid the potential risk of bias, objective or subjective, in reviewing the work and outcomes of the body.

The normal way of implementation within the workforce is to involve employers and the workers. An external person who has nothing to do with the process has nothing to do with it normally. The employers - my Department - are represented and the workers are represented through their unions and an objective outcome is demonstrable. If any of their presentation is not robust, that can be checked.

Sale of State Assets

Ceisteanna (12)

Brendan Smith

Ceist:

117Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if recent discussions with the Troika have impacted on the timetable for the proposed sale of State assets; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20280/12]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí ó Béal (5 píosaí cainte)

The Government remains committed under the EU-ECB-IMF funding programme to outlining in detail for the troika, by the end of the second quarter, end of June 2012, the specific regulatory, legislative, corporate governance and financial reforms which need to be taken in 2012, ensuring consistency with relevant EU legislation where necessary, to allow for the asset sale programme to proceed in 2013, and a calendar with indicative timelines for sales will be set out. The issues requiring resolution having already been identified by the end of the first quarter, work is ongoing in the relevant Departments and agencies on considering how they should be addressed in order to facilitate the launch of sale transactions in 2013.

Nothing has arisen during the troika's current mission that affects this timetable.

We mentioned the national lottery licence earlier and I would consider that to be a State asset. Does it come under the remit of these discussions and if not, why not? Is the troika happy the sale of the licence should proceed? I would consider it as much a State asset as some of the other assets being sold. On several occasions Ministers have said there will be no fire sale of State assets. However, twice in his response the Minister mentioned sales will commence next year. There is no guarantee that we will not remain in a fire sale situation next year. What is the Minister's position with regard to the timetable for sales if global economic conditions are not suitable for a sale of assets next year? Has the troika a problem with moving the sale out for a further 12 months? If State assets are to be sold, everybody here wants them to be sold at the best possible price in the interest of the taxpayer, rather than a quick sale in the interest of the European Central Bank.

The Deputy raises two points. I would welcome his support for not including the national lottery licence in the asset sales being discussed. The troika has not discussed this with me. I announced this in the context of the capital programme last year because I want to use the bulk of the up-front payment to pay for the national children's hospital. I do not want that dislodged and would welcome the Deputy's support for maintaining that income stream to build the hospital.

With regard to beginning sales of assets next year, that will not constitute a fire sale. The first reason for this is that we have done our due diligence. The main asset to be sold is the energy generating division of Bord Gáis Éireann. We know, because we have done our due diligence, that there is significant interest in the market for that. I have indicated twice to the House, and I do so again now, that we will sell nothing that does not present fair value to the taxpayer in terms of market price. If market conditions change remarkably between now and next year - I do not envisage they will - we will have to think again, because we will not sell any asset that does not accrue fair value to the State. I assure the Deputy of that. Judging by the due diligence we have already conducted, there is significant interest. I agree, however, that until one tests the market with a product, one is not certain of that.

I share Deputy Fleming's concern about the fixed timing of the sale and the potential of it being a fire sale. The majority of people do not want to see a selling off of the family silver. I understand that the Labour Party had its party conference in the past week or so and that the party took a fairly trenchant view with regard to the sale of State assets and was against that. Has that influenced the Minister's thinking and is there any chance that the position of the delegates to the Labour Party conference will prevail in Government policy?

There will be no question of selling off the family silver. From the beginning, we have said that we negotiated a programme for Government with Fine Gael. I am responding to questions here as a Member of the Government, not as a Labour Party member. The Labour Party makes up one third of the Government and we negotiated a programme for Government which includes a sale of State assets and that programme was overwhelmingly approved by the Labour Party conference and by Fine Gael through its validation process. That is the agreement we will work towards.

The view of members of my party comes as no surprise to me. I have a firm attachment to State assets and a firm appreciation of the role State companies have played in the generating of our economy. We will continue to ensure that the State sector plays a vital part in the generation of new jobs. It is for that reason the biggest State company of recent times was announced last week by the Government.

EU-IMF Programme

Ceisteanna (13, 14)

John Halligan

Ceist:

118Deputy John Halligan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will report on his meeting with representatives of the Troika on 17 April 2012; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20257/12]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Richard Boyd Barrett

Ceist:

130Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will report on his meeting with Ajai Chopra, the European deputy director of the IMF, the ECB’s chief economist Klaus Masuch and Istvan Szekely of the European Commission on 17 April 2012; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20293/12]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí ó Béal (6 píosaí cainte)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 118 and 130 together.

I met with the troika delegation on 17 April together with my colleague, the Minister for Finance, Deputy Michael Noonan, and a number of senior officials from our Departments. The purpose of the meeting was to exchange views on how the programme is progressing in terms of meeting our targets since the previous quarterly review.

This is the troika's sixth quarterly review and the primary focus is to evaluate our performance against the targets set for the end of the first quarter of 2012 and to assess progress on targets due in the coming quarter. There has been a series of meetings held with the troika to appraise all the elements of the programme covering fiscal developments, the macro-economic outlook, progress on commitments regarding restructuring the financial sector and structural reform. These meetings will conclude on Thursday, 26 April with a further meeting between the principals, Minister Noonan and myself.

Verification of the relevant quarterly targets forms a key part of the mission and the Government has repeatedly stated that meeting these conditions on time and on target is the best way to ensure we emerge successfully from this programme, which is our primary focus. It is important to build confidence in the State's ability to manage its debt and deficit to enable us to return with confidence to the financial markets for funding in as timely a manner as possible. This is one of the principal objectives of the programme. The Government's commitment to the programme does not stop us from seeking and agreeing changes to aspects of the programme. We have already done this successfully and the Government will continue to do so at the appropriate time.

Following each review mission, and arising from detailed and lengthy discussions with the troika team during it, revised versions of the programme documents, including the memorandum of understanding on specific economic policy conditionality, are prepared by officials of my Department and the Department of Finance along with officials from the Central Bank in conjunction with the external partners. It would be premature at this stage to comment on the possible outcome of these discussions, but I am satisfied there will be a positive outcome to the review.

It is also important to note that the relevant programme documents are made publicly available at the end of the process.

The Minister said he discussed the macroeconomic outlook with the troika. The discussions are continuing until Thursday. Is there any recognition on the part of the troika, given the deteriorating economic situation in Europe, the fact that this is the third quarter in a row with economic contraction across Europe and there has been a return of the debt crisis, that its austerity agenda is not working, either here or in Europe, and that alternative strategies need to be considered? It was reported prior to the meeting that they would discuss in detail so-called labour activation measures. In his discussions with the troika either at this meeting or at previous meetings, was the decision to cut the lone parent payment once a child reached the age of seven years considered a labour activation measure? Lone parents maintain that the plan to cut off payments after the child has reached the age of seven years will, in fact, drive lone parents out of the workplace and into full dependency on social welfare. Was this matter discussed with the troika?

Of course the macroeconomic situation was discussed with the troika. We discussed the specific details of our own economy and also the position of this economy within the European context and in the global context, which is very important. The objective of this programme is to get us back to normal funding. The Government's yardstick is always the question of whether it is working. Deputy Boyd Barrett was not here when I replied to the first questions today and described the disciplines we are required to impose upon ourselves because we cannot continue to borrow at our current rate of borrowing. Even Deputy Boyd Barrett understands this. However, this is not the complete strategy because it requires other elements. We need to work towards a balanced budget and a deficit target of 3% by 2015 and a deficit target this year of 8.6%, as a stepping stone towards that target, with a target of 7.5% next year and so on. Of itself this is important but it is not the only strategy; stimulus is also necessary. The Government has worked on looking at the areas of stimulus, such as the use of the National Pensions Reserve Fund, the establishment of the NewERA entity and the establishment of the Strategic Investment Fund. We have concluded negotiations with the troika for the use of one third of the proceeds of State assets sales for productive job-creation purposes. We have also engaged with the pension funds to see if more can be invested here. A range of initiatives has been devised to stimulate the economy as well as working on the balanced budget approach which we need to do at the same time.

I can only comment that as the austerity agenda is rolled out across the rest of Europe, it is becoming increasingly clear that the damage done to the peripheral countries is now spreading to the core and is completely depressing the European economy in all parts. It is disappointing if there is not some discussion about the implications.

I specifically asked the Minister whether cuts directed at lone parents were discussed as so-called labour activation measures. I refer to the cut in the lone parent allowance once a child has reached seven years. Was this proposal conceived as a so-called labour activation measure?

No. The troika did not raise that issue with us and we did not raise it during the current round.

Barr
Roinn