Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Others have spoken to the concerns around the process and the way decisions are being made. I want to begin from below. We have spoken about the context of the pandemic. The decisions are also happening in the context of the end of some of the financial emergency measures in the public interest, FEMPI, the unravelling of FEMPI, the wider issue of the public pay review and the restoration of public pay. This is a big concern I have, leaving aside some of the very important questions others have asked on the exact stages of the process, who advised whom and to what extent.

I have read some of the responses we received from Departments on the building momentum pay agreement. They speak about how somebody on €25,000 might see a 4% increase over the lifetime of that agreement. However, we have this role, which is also a public role, for which we are looking at a 40% increase all of our sudden. I have this concern about what message is being sent. Mr. Fraser spoke about market sentiment and the factors that might influence those who apply or do not apply. This is really a question for the Taoiseach about leadership and the Department of the Taoiseach with regard to the message it sends when we have this tiptoeing increase for those on lower incomes.

The wages of the secretarial assistants in the Seanad start at €24,000. They were told previously by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform there is a concern that if the figure were increased, it could send a politically negative message. We have slow, incremental, tiny increases. The goal, and the stated policy, has been that the unwinding of FEMPI would begin with those on lower incomes. This would be the priority and it would send the signal and message we need to send to society. Does Mr. Fraser see damage to this message when we see this large increase at the same time as we have these small measures?

I appreciate that we need appropriate people for roles. I sat on a committee where the Data Protection Commission spoke about its difficulties in getting appropriate people to do its very important work because of the very rigid rules not at the top level but in the mid-level at which it hires. These are all people who are staying within the scales of our public service. Often, they have encountered real difficulties doing what they need to do, even within those scales. We have seen those at the very bottom of scale getting paltry increases that will creep up and will not even match their rent increases. Then we see this 40% spike. Is Mr. Fraser concerned about the message this sends? Does he see damage not just in the knock-on effect on claims? We know of this because Mr. Fraser has already cited the CEO of the HSE and the Garda Commissioner as examples. The very fact he is giving us these examples to justify this tells us there will be a knock-on effect at the top level. Is he worried about the signal it sends to those on the lower incomes in our public service?