Priority Questions
1. Deputy Sean Fleming asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform his views on whether the full targeted savings under the Haddington Road agreement will be achieved in 2013 and 2014; the implications of the rejection of the agreement by the ASTI for the achievement of the target; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [42568/13]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe Haddington Road agreement sets out the basis of a further €1 billion contribution by the public service pay and pensions bill to our fiscal recovery through a series of equitable and sustainable measures. These measures will allow for the creation of a more streamlined and unified public service. In addition, the agreement will give certainty to public servants over the next three year period.
As Members of the House are acutely aware, we entered into discussions with trade unions with an ambitious target of agreeing on a number of measures aimed at reducing the public service pay and pensions bill by €1 billion by the end of 2015 and by €300 million this year. That was the basis on which we engaged with staff representatives and it was the imperative on which any agreement had to be delivered. As I have stated previously in the House, the Government is satisfied that the provisions set out in the Haddington Road agreement will deliver the targeted savings of €300 million this year and €1 billion by 2015.
The agreement has already started to deliver in terms of significant cost reductions, increased productivity, changes to work practices and key reforms. The €300 million savings target for 2013, arising from measures under the agreement, was incorporated into the various Votes in the context of the Revised Estimates, which I published last April as the Deputy will recall. In this context, Deputies will be aware that the Exchequer returns at the end of September show that expenditure is being effectively managed within those voted allocations. The Haddington Road agreement is playing a key part in ensuring expenditure continues to be contained within those relevant ceilings.
I find the outcome of the ASTI ballot on the agreement regrettable. The Government is fully supportive of the Minister for Education and Skills in seeking to minimise the disruption the industrial action taken by teachers will cause in classrooms, while seeking to ensure the integrity of the public service agreement, and the achievement of the necessary savings from the education sector pay bill. I again ask the ASTI to examine the costs to its members of remaining outside the Haddington Road agreement and to reflect further upon this matter, particularly given that the non-implementation of this agreement will have the greatest impact on young, newly qualified teachers.
I thank the Minister for that general reply. He confirmed there will be savings of €300 million this year and in regard to the Croke Park agreement, now the Haddington Road agreement, that serious savings are targeted for the health services in particular. I know the Minister will say that savings are a fraction under budget but there seems to be underlining trends in that cost savings have not been fully agreed and there seems to be a breakdown in the overall management of the HSE finances in that figures are coming in on a region by region basis but not adequately on an overall basis. Some funding last year could not be accounted for in the Comptroller and Auditor General's report in terms of where overruns occurred. The Minister might be able to tell us if there will be a Supplementary Estimate for the health area as a result of the Haddington Road agreement not being implemented in full in the course of this year.
The Minister expressed his support for the Minister, Deputy Quinn but I hope he would agree with me that his opening remarks following the ASTI vote, when he spoke about the issue of compulsory redundancies, were at best most unhelpful.
I cannot be definitive on whether there will be a Supplementary Estimate for the health area. I can tell the Deputy that the most recent figures we have, which I just published last week, show that every line Department is within profile, either below its voted expenditure limits by the end of September or on target. Out of an amount in excess of €6.9 billion, the Department of Health was €1 billion off target, and we will have to monitor that between now and the end of the year. As the Deputy knows, health is a very volatile area in terms of demand. We do not know whether there will be a winter vomiting bug or something else that would dislodge matters, but as of now the Department is on target, and I hope that will be the case for it. I will forward the Deputy a breakdown of the €300 million savings figure arising out of pay if he is interested in how we apportioned it for the year. It might be helpful in pursing this in committee where there is more time to pursue these matters.
I acknowledge what the Minister said. I look forward to receiving the e-mail to be forwarded to me and I will study it. It will be helpful, especially in light of the budget next Tuesday.
A monetary mechanism is an element that may be missing in respect of the Haddington Road agreement. Is there a proper monetary mechanism in place in respect of it? We had a good implementation committee in place that produced regular reports which showed cost savings, and most people were comfortable when there was a body doing that. What arrangement has the Minister in place in order that members of the public who are the taxpayers can be satisfied these targets are being achieved and that they are not simply being masked in the overall public sector pay bill, namely, that they are attributable to the Haddington Road agreement? I would ask the Minister to have some external people from the pubic service management and public service trade unions involved in that process It would add credibility to such a process if one or two outsiders where involved in it and people would be more satisfied about it.
Does the Minister propose to contact the Labour Relations Commission or the Minister for Education and Skills regarding the ASTI? What actions will the Minister take to ensure students are not disadvantaged? This is all about pupils at the end of the day.
The Deputy has asked a number of questions. First, in regard to the monitoring apparatus for the new Haddington Road agreement, Deputies opposite were quite critical of the monitoring of the last one. I thought it was a good monitoring system because it gave quantifiable savings and some of those were externally audited again by a firm of auditors. I am open to suggestions in that regard. The last monitoring system was exclusively in-house in that it involved the unions and the management of the public service. I do not know whether some external person might be better, but I am willing to hear any ideas in this regard.
On the ASTI dispute, the union is the only one outside the agreement. We cannot allow the Haddington Road agreement to unravel. It is a critical part of the economic projections on the road to recovery. ASTI members understand that and I would hope we would have some engagement. It will be a matter primarily for the Minister for the Education and Skills to ensure the ASTI is brought within the fold. That would be in its members' interests.
2. Deputy Mary Lou McDonald asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will equality proof budget 2014 in advance of his announcement and publish the findings of the proofing process on budget day. [42567/13]
Amharc ar fhreagraWith regard to this budget, while the primary objective has been to reduce the deficit and return stability to the public finances, it has been vital to the Government to spread the burden of adjustments in as fair and as equitable a manner as possible while also seeking to minimise any negative impact on economic growth and job maintenance. Furthermore, it is the Government's responsibility to ensure all available resources are spent carefully and that critical public services continue to be delivered.
In this context, the Government recognises that expenditure on social supports has an important impact on stabilising our domestic economy through supporting the overall demand for goods and services. Over recent years, we have maintained primary weekly rates of social welfare. This year we will spend €20.2 billion on social welfare. This means that all pensioners and all those under the age of 66, such as people with disabilities or jobseekers, will have their weekly primary payments maintained, and that has been the case since this Government took office.
Similarly, in the area of education, the Government has protected DEIS resources. In budget 2013, for example, we ensured there was no overall change to DEIS related staffing levels or DEIS funding. As part of the DEIS programme, over the course of this year some €93 million is being provided to 850 schools supporting 167,000 pupils. This funding is provided, in addition to the normal funds allocated to tackle educational disadvantage, by prioritising the educational needs of children and young people from disadvantaged communities, from preschool right through second level education.
All Ministers are responsible for assessing policy proposals in their areas and considerations of equality form an important component of budgetary discussions by Government. When making Government decisions on budget matters, the Government is very much aware of issues such as gender equality, persons experiencing risk of poverty or social exclusion, and people with disabilities. These proposals are under careful consideration by Government in advance of finalising next year's Estimates and, on budget day, the Government will publish illustrative cases showing the effect of major changes in revenue and certain social welfare payments.
If the Minister's objectives have been to underwrite fairness and equity in his budgetary efforts, he has clearly and manifestly failed. If his objective has been to enhance growth, he certainly has failed because officials tell us that we have precisely zero growth this year. I asked the Minister about equality budgeting and I have raised this issue with him many times.
It is clear to everyone that fairness is not writ large in the Government's budgetary efforts. On the contrary, the ESRI has clearly indicated that the two most recent budgets were regressive and placed the burden on those least able to shoulder it, particularly individuals who are parenting alone.
The Minister indicated that Departments look into their hearts and give due consideration to issues of equality. I am seeking something entirely different, namely, a systematic and transparent assessment of the Government's budget proposals in order to check them for equality on the basis of the nine grounds which apply in this regard. Such an assessment would be similar to the statutory duty which exists in the North of Ireland and the practice which obtains in other jurisdictions. If the Government is going to refer to fairness and equality, it must do its homework and have in its possession the data to support its case. We should not be obliged to face budget after budget where the Government hammers people on low incomes and turns its face away from even considering taxing the wealthy.
As is normally the case when discussing matters of this nature, the Deputy is profoundly wrong. The Government has reversed the reduction in the minimum wage, removed 350,000 low-paid workers from the net relating to the universal social charge and protected all core social welfare payments. One can take a snapshot of individual budgets rather than considering the overall picture. Ireland has the most progressive income tax system in the OECD. If one already has the most progressive system, it is extremely difficult to make it even more progressive. Whereas if one has the worst and least progressive system, any change at all will make it more progressive in the context of a snapshot analysis. People understand that fact.
The Deputy is also incorrect in stating that there will be no growth this year. We had significant growth last year but the figure for this year will be lower. Even the worst analysis indicates that there will be growth of 0.2% this year. The most recent ESRI projections for next year indicate that the economic strategy employed by the Government during the past two and a half years has ensured that we have balanced the budget and maintained jobs. In fact, we are now creating 3,000 net new jobs per month. This represents a profound sea-change in the country's fortunes since we inherited a disastrous situation a mere two and a half years ago.
There has not been a profound sea-change. That is the difficulty. I stand corrected that there will be 0.2% growth this year.
That is what the worst projections show.
Bravo. Good for the Government. It is, however, hardly a resounding success. In the most recent budget, the Government imposed a property tax on family homes and cut child benefit, the back-to-school clothing and footwear allowance, jobseeker's benefit and the respite care grant. It also increased fees for students at third level, raised the thresholds relating to student grants, etc. I put it to the Minister that none of these measures bear equality as their hallmark. As the Government saw it, these cuts and increases hit the same people who were hit by the previous Fianna Fáil Administration in its budgetary efforts. We need a system of robust and transparent equality proofing that will be underpinned statutorily - in other words, in law - in order to ensure that when budgets are brought forward, the consequences for different groups in society will be fully measured and understood. The Government cannot make a claim for fairness and equality if it is not prepared to sign up to such a system, the establishment of which was supported by the Minister's party at its conference last year.
Sinn Féin's attitude when we took offices was that we should have told the troika to take a hike and take its money with it. If we had taken that party's advice, there would be no social welfare or educational provision and we would not have an economy. The economic strategy employed by the Government has brought us back to sustainability. We have taken very difficult decisions and the Deputy outlined a number of these.
Yes, they were difficult for the people on the receiving end.
It is as if there are soft options available. The Deputy appears to believe we can sprinkle fairy dust and all will be well. I am afraid we do not live in that reality.
On the specifics, we indicated that there would be three successive increases of €250 in student registration charges. We have not reintroduced fees. The Deputy's party is in power in the North and student fees there stand at £5,000 per year. Even when we have completed the programme of increases, the level of the registration charge will be nothing of that order. In the remainder of the United Kingdom, students are charged fees of £9,000 each year. We have been obliged to make difficult decisions. However, we are hopefully coming to the end of the series of budgets in respect of which it has been necessary to make such decisions. We gave a commitment to the Irish people that we would bring the economy back into balance, create a sustainable future for our children and protect social provision into the future rather than collapse all of these, as would have been the case if the policies espoused by the Deputy's party had been adopted.
The Leas-Cheann Comhairle has agreed that Deputy Mick Wallace can take question No. 3 in Deputy Luke 'Ming' Flanagan's stead.
3. Deputy Luke 'Ming' Flanagan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform with regard to the shovel ready projects spoken of last year, the progress that has been made on getting such projects up and running; if he will outline any tangible results from this policy; if he will indicate the benefits this approach has had for the masses of young persons who are unemployed here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [42739/13]
Amharc ar fhreagraI welcome my constituency colleague, Deputy Wallace, to the House and to Priority Questions. As he is aware, job creation is a critical priority for Government. In July 2012 the Government announced its plans for an additional €2.25 billion investment in public infrastructure projects in Ireland. The most important contribution capital investment can make is to provide the capacity for the economy to grow, which, in turn, will create jobs. The largest portion of the stimulus package included €1.4 billion to fund the proposed new public private partnership, PPP, programme and the delivery of this was the initial focus for my Department. This €1.4 billion investment is additional to the direct investment by the Exchequer in infrastructure, which will be some €3.4 billion this year. That is a great deal of money.
In July I announced details of the first tranche of the Exchequer phase of projects worth €150 million. This investment will be in schools, roads and local authority energy efficiency projects. Under the latter, retrofitting will take place in respect of some 25,000 local authority houses. Progress is being made on the roll-out of the roads projects by the relevant local authorities and I am informed that the money allocated will be completely expended this year. The Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport expects to spend its full allocation of €50 million by the end of the year. The Department of Education and Skills expects to spend approximately €10 million of its additional allocation on various projects by the end of the year. The balance will be rolled over into next year.
Activity on the PPP programme is well under way, with five of the nine projects already issued to market. The flagship Grangegorman project, which is valued at over €200 million, is due to issue in the coming weeks. I am pleased to report that there has been very active market engagement from both investors and construction companies in this area. That reflects the growing confidence in the Irish economy. Investment in the projects included in the stimulus package is expected to generate significant numbers of jobs throughout the country. Analysis of each sector indicates that the investment in PPP projects will generate in the region of 13,000 direct jobs and many more indirect jobs.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
At this early stage in the process, most of the employment impact has been in the technical and advisory areas. The indicative timetable for the projects suggests construction is expected to commence on the first roads project by the end of 2013 and on the accommodation projects by quarter four of 2014.
As part of the ongoing monitoring of employment in respect of current PPPs, the most recent figures from the schools bundle 3 project indicate 4,079 man months of full-time equivalent employment have been engaged up to the end of August. We will also be monitoring the level of employment being created during the construction of the N11 and Newlands Cross PPP which commenced in June.
My Department, together with the National Development Finance Agency, NDFA, and the sponsoring authorities has examined how to maximise job creation as part of each tender competition. As a result of this, a pilot is under way for the schools building programme. In that context, tender competitions will now include a clause which sets out particular employment requirements such as 10% of the aggregate number of person weeks carried out on the site to be undertaken by those who are recruited from the ranks of the long-term unemployed. In addition, 2.5% of the aggregate number of person weeks carried out on the site will be undertaken by apprentices. Feedback received by my Department from the NDFA is that the Intreo office in the Department of Social Protection is very keen to become involved in this initiative and is actively setting up the relevant contacts with contractors at local level. Enterprise Ireland is also involved in running workshops and "Meet the Buyer" events aimed at the SME sector. The NDFA's initial impression is that the initiative is working well.
Approximately one year ago the Minister informed me that he was in favour of ensuring that the leaks in the water supply system would be repaired before the process of installing water meters commenced. We agreed that while this would cost money, it would lead to the creation of a great deal of work. Given that over 40% of our water leaks into the ground, the Minister agreed that it would make sense to fix the pipes before we began installing meters to measure what comes out of them. However, we have started the process of installing meters without proceeding to fix the pipes in any serious way. Irish Water is taking control of the water system and I am concerned - perhaps the Minister is too - that the water services investment programme may be adversely affected. Irish Water is not really going to be in a position to continue with the upgrades to water supply and sewerage schemes that have been planned by local authorities. Evidence from throughout the country appears to show that these upgrades are beginning to stall. That will certainly have an impact on employment. Will the Minister indicate what he proposes to do in respect of this matter?
Some of those question are not particularly germane to my area of responsibility but I will do my best to answer them. Irish Water is the new flagship State agency. It will be a commercial semi-State body, the largest created since the ESB. It will have a significant quantum of money to invest, not only in respect of water metering but also in the context of water development. Such investment must be made because there is a need to provide clean, safe water for homes, schools and hospitals and also for industry. Increasing numbers of the businesses we are attracting here in the areas of pharmaceuticals and ICT require high-quality water supplies. That is a very important consideration. We need to proceed with this matter in a sustainable way. In the context of global warming, the Deputy is well aware that we will be obliged to put in place measures in respect of areas such as that in which we live, namely, the south east, which it is predicted will experience water deficiencies in the future.
All these matters are fully encompassed by Irish Water, including the addressing of the leaks issue, which is very much on its agenda. We will have a much more sustainable water supply system in place with a uniquely focused Irish Water company.
The Minister has still not explained why we are not fixing the pipes before putting in the meters. On the issue of youth unemployment, there is little doubt that austerity has had a bigger impact on youth unemployment than on people over the age of 25 and especially over the age of 30. The schemes the Government has come up with have not solved youth unemployment. The only release valve seems to be emigration. While I know the figure is down to 26%, it seems that is due to more emigration.
Without a shadow of a doubt, the domestic economy has traditionally given more work to young people starting out than any other sector. People can talk about growth in the export figures but as long as the domestic economy has problems and living standards continue to fall for most people, it is hard to see jobs being created in that area. One of the few measures the Government took to deal with the domestic economy's problems was reducing the VAT rate to 9%. I do not know whether it will be retained in this budget.
We have been round the houses on the issue of rates and upward-only rents. People will say rates are being reviewed. I have rates being reviewed in respect of five wine bars and the proposal is that they will go up by 47% and not down.
Youth unemployment is a critical issue. Thankfully, we have less than half the youth unemployment challenge as Spain. We have a variety of initiatives under way, including JobBridge, to tackle it. We have increased the number of young people in work, so it is not simply the emigration valve. There are actually more young people at work, which is very important.
The youth guarantee is a new initiative we negotiated as part of the multi-annual financial framework during the Irish Presidency, and it will be rolled out next year. As the Deputy knows, it will become live on 1 January with European funding to match Irish funding. Tackling the unemployment problem is the number one priority for this country. Most impartial observers will see the fruits of all the work we have been doing, with the numbers in jobs increasing for the first time since 2008.
4. Deputy Sean Fleming asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the reason the Government is using under spending of the capital budget to provide a safety net for the overall budgetary position for 2013; his views on whether this is costing jobs in the current year; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [42569/13]
Amharc ar fhreagraFor 2013, the Government set a general Government deficit target of 7.5% of GDP and the expenditure ceilings underpinning the budget were set on this basis. It is too early to estimate the end of year outturn in regard to the 2013 current and capital expenditure allocations. As I indicated, the end of September Exchequer returns are on target.
While net capital expenditure was 17% below profile at the end of September, information supplied to me by Departments indicates that the majority of their remaining capital budgets will be spent by year end. The spending pattern is in line with trends from previous years which show that the bulk of capital expenditure takes place in the last quarter of the year. Where this is not possible, the allocation, to a maximum of 10%, will be rolled over into the next year.
As the Deputy will be aware, capital spending has general characteristics which influence the allocation drawdown pattern. Expenditure on capital projects typically occurs in large payment tranches at fixed milestones, unlike current expenditure which is generally continuous throughout the year. Obviously, this affects the phasing and profiling of capital expenditure. The profiling of capital expenditure is carried out by individual Departments on the basis of the likely timing of payments related to capital projects and programmes which they deliver.
In June of this year, I announced additional Exchequer investment of €150 million. The focus of this investment will be on relatively small-scale capital works that are labour intensive. Specifically, €50 million will be invested in maintenance and repair of our local and regional roads, €50 million will be used for retrofitting of local authority housing and €50 million will go towards refurbishment, replacement and extension works to 28 schools. Through this additional investment, I hope the jobs impact of Exchequer capital spending will be significant this year and into next year.
The reason I raise this is that last year, the Minister underspent his capital budget by €145 million, even though I am sure the talk this time last year was that he expected to spend it all. The Department of Finance and NAMA project that €1 billion of capital expenditure equates to anywhere between 10,000 and 17,000 jobs in the economy, so the Minister's underspend last year alone cost up to 2,000 jobs. So far this year, the Minister has underspent by 17% or €305 million. Some of that will be spent by the end of the year but it raises the question that if the Minister knows most of the spending will occur in the last three months of the year, why does he not adjust the profile to reflect what he knows to be the reality. I am concerned that Departments, especially the Minister's Department, cannot get that right.
The Minister mentioned the roll-over of unused capital expenditure. Much of that was in water services departments. The biggest element ties in with the earlier comment on water services and the possibility of local authorities holding back on using some of their own funds to co-fund major projects. That will leave a deficit in water services which Irish Water will not want to know about.
I was very honest with the Deputy when he asked this question. There was a significant underspend last year by local authorities on the water system. They saw Irish Water coming along and did not want to use any of their own co-funding money to do sanctioned water schemes. I applied as much pressure as I could but local authorities are independent in making those decisions. It is certainly an issue.
I want any allocated capital to be spent because I scrimp and save and push to get that capital. I had discussions with the European Investment Bank, the Council of Europe Development Bank and with our domestic banks to find capital. We need to supplement the capital spend on the public side because so little is being spent on the private side, except for foreign direct investment, with Intel and others building. We need to ensure what is allocated is spent, and I will continue to endeavour to do that.
The Deputies opposite can help in the committees by ensuring periodically during the year that line Ministers apply whatever pressure they can, whether in the education sector, the environment sector or whatever sector, to ensure voted money is spent in accordance with their scheduling.
The Minister trumpeted the €150 million in further investment in capital projects during the year, but this ignores the fact that he cut the capital budget this year by €500 million. Even allowing for the additional €150 million, the budget will be down €350 million, which costs approximately 6,000 jobs.
I think we have discussed this before, but the Minister should have put some mechanism in place so that where local authorities spend their development levies, they could, in some way, be compensated for that in the transfer to Irish Water. I am not saying extra money but Irish Water should not get the value of local authority funding. Irish Water should acknowledge, in some way, the recent spending because this will continue until Irish Water is up and running. I am concerned that this will stall and Irish Water will not have the resources in its first six months or 12 months of operation to continue much-needed work. Water service is not a nebulous concept. It is water quality and service which everybody needs.
I agree with much of what the Deputy said. As he knows, we are putting a tranche of investment into Irish Water through the National Pensions Reserve Fund. Legislation will be brought in before the end of the year by the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, which will change the National Pensions Reserve Fund into the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund. That device will be a primer of jobs across the economy.
In 2011, we announced what the profile of capital expenditure would be, so there is nothing new. We are not cutting every year. We had to balance the books as best we could. We are spending almost €17 billion in the voted public capital programme. That is being supplemented by other announcements I have made, such as the €2.25 billion last year and the €150 million, modest enough as it is, this year. One hopes there will be more announcements when the sale of State assets comes through to supplement necessary capital investment. In terms of the monitoring about which the Deputy spoke, he made some good suggestions which will certainly be reflected on.
5. Deputy John Halligan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the number of public sector workers currently employed here; the number of job losses which will be seen up to the end of 2015; his views on whether his plan to further reduce the numbers of public service workers is flawed and will ultimately result in already stretched Departments reaching breaking point; his views on whether having a public service that currently barely functions having no cover for either sick leave or maternity leave seriously affects the service it provides; his views on whether the backlogs in various Departments are accumulating as a direct result of the cutbacks and reduced staffing levels; if he will commit to putting in place an alternative strategy to reach the €1 billion in spending cuts he hopes to achieve by 2015; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [42740/13]
Amharc ar fhreagraPublic service numbers stood at 290,400 at the end of 2012. That number should have decreased to 282,500 by 2015, in line with the target set by the Government. This means that between now and 2015, the number employed in the public service will fall in net terms by a further 2.7%. I anticipate that this will mostly be achieved through natural retirement across the service, while allowing for recruitment in areas where that is authorised. The 282,500 target will mark a 12% reduction in the size of the public service since the peak value of 320,000 in 2008.
The Government’s policy on reducing the size of the public service is one of its key broader reform agenda items. It needs to be understood in the context of two main drivers. First, there is undeniably a need to repair the public finances. Second, we need to improve and catch up with international best practice in how public services are delivered. This is why through reform initiatives we are building on existing good practices and addressing areas where there are too many agencies, too much duplication, not enough automation, not enough use of e-technologies, not enough shared services, poor practices and sub-optimal structures. This transition is difficult. It is difficult to shed staff while maintaining service levels and rolling out new services, but it is necessary.
To help us safeguard our core public services, we will deliver an unprecedented increase in productivity across the public service through the Haddington Road agreement, which is currently under way. We will provide for almost 15 million additional working hours and a range of other reforms and efficiencies agreed by the public sector unions. One of the main benefits of these additional hours is that they will allow public service management to maintain services with fewer staff. We have already achieved real and tangible progress in areas such as cost reduction, improving efficiency and enhancing service delivery. The roll-out of reform against a backdrop of reduced numbers has produced challenges. I compliment all those in the public service who have risen to the challenge.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
In so far as possible, front-line services have been protected. In parallel, there has been real and permanent reform of service delivery models to the benefit of citizens and businesses. Earlier this year, we launched the Civil Service human resources and pensions shared services centre. It serves over 15,000 employees across 13 organisations. When it is fully operational, it will lead to substantial savings estimated at €12.5 million annually, with a reduction of 17% in staff numbers in human resources across the Civil Service. We have allowed for some targeted recruitment into priority areas, particularly health and education, while continuing to reduce the size of the public service overall. Redeployment has been an important enabler of this managed reduction of public service numbers. Since 2010, more than 10,000 surplus staff have been redeployed into priority areas. With regard to alternative strategies to achieve savings, I remind the Deputy that the cost of running the public service in Ireland accounts for some 36% of total Government expenditure. It would be impossible to put the public finances back onto a sustainable footing without addressing this sizable element of the cost base.
I acknowledge that the Government is adamant that the downsizing of the public service has saved the country a great deal of money, despite its catastrophic impact on public services. Many people are not buying the Government's line that the reduction of almost 30,000 in public service numbers since 2008 is a success story. Would the Minister agree that the exodus from the public service has hit the front line hardest and has resulted in a disastrous draining of knowledge, skills, experience and expertise that has been developed over many years? I will give two examples. As a result of the loss of almost 5,000 posts in the health service, some 160,000 people have been on Waterford Regional Hospital's waiting list for up to 12 months, some 46,000 people have been on the list for over a year and some 570 patients have been on the list for more than four years. In the education sector, approximately 400 posts are currently being filled by teaching staff who are in receipt of pension payments even though many newly qualified teachers are being forced to emigrate. Can the Minister clarify whether the Cabinet has an actual strategy to deal with the impact on services of these job losses? If there is such a strategy, everybody would be pleased to hear about it. The Minister mentioned the delivery of services. I have given two examples - in the health and education systems - of services that are not being delivered.
The Deputy is wrong.
These are facts.
Many more people are being treated in the health service this year than ever before. We have 80,000 more pupils being taught in our schools. There are 900 more teachers this year. We can be fanciful about things and play politics with them, but that is the reality.
These are the Government's figures. They are not my figures.
We are trying to create a new type of public service. It is difficult to do so because there is a resistance to change. A great deal of work that used to be done at clerical officer level, for example, is no longer required because many people now do their own direct inputting. We are creating a different type of public service, which is much more in tune with the needs of a modern, 21st century economy. There have been no compulsory redundancies since we came into office. The Deputy is wrong when he speaks about a brain drain. The people who have gone were approaching retirement, by and large. They went to ensure they could retire at the pre-cut level of salary. There have been no compulsory redundancies. Nobody has been forced out. The specific point the Deputy made about teachers is valid. The Minister for Education and Skills has issued a directive on this matter. It was to be incorporated in law and I think it should be. It is a matter of practice on the ground. Retired teachers should not be recruited to fill substitution posts. Those posts should be filled from a panel of unemployed teachers. The Minister, Deputy Quinn, is determined to achieve that objective.
I am not arguing that there is no need to make savings. Everyone in opposition knows that public sector reform must happen. It would be folly for us to think otherwise. The persistent slashing of public sector members will not solve the State's economic problems. I would like to mention an interesting impact study that was published by the ESRI recently on the impact of fiscal cuts on the general Government debt. The ESRI found that reducing the number of public service employees actually increases the debt. I do not know if the Minister is familiar with the study, which the ESRI released recently. According to the ESRI study, the only real long-term reduction in the debt happens because of emigration. I have cited the health and education services as examples of quality not increasing as a result of cuts. Like many others, I accept that we need to deal with the public service by making it more efficient. I do not know whether everybody in opposition acknowledges that, but I am prepared to do so publicly. Having spoken to teachers, doctors and nurses who work on the front line, I know they do not see a good end result.
As the Deputy knows, no teachers have been made redundant. Teachers who retire are replaced, which means there are more teachers now than ever before.
There are more pupils.
The pupil-teacher ratio is fixed. If there are more pupils, there are more teachers. The fact is that there are 900 additional teachers this year. The Deputy has spoken about slashing public services. I reiterate that there have been no compulsory redundancies. In such circumstances, how can he say there has been slashing? Everybody who has left has retired naturally or has chosen to leave. Nobody has been forced out. There has been no slashing in this country, unlike other countries that have faced the economic pressures and crises we have faced. We have had none of what happened in Spain or Greece. We have maintained and increased the level of efficiency in the public service with the co-operation of public servants, to their great credit. I acknowledge that they have endured reductions in pay rates, increased hours and more pressure. They are to be lauded and congratulated for that. When we get beyond this crisis, we will have a better public service that is more in tune with modernity. We will be able to grow the public service again to meet the new demands of a different type of society.
