Richard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)

I move amendment No. 9:

In page 8, between lines 30 and 31, to insert the following:

"(2) The Council shall, prior to the commencement of negotiation of agreements between the Government and the social partners, present to the Oireachtas an assessment of key strategic challenges relating to the efficient development of the economy and the achievement of social "justice" and set out a strategic framework for endorsement or amendment by the Oireachtas before the negotiations commence.".

As I stated on the Order of Business, it is extraordinary that the last social partnership agreement never came before the House in any shape or form. It did not come before the House at the stage where we could influence the agenda to be discussed by the social partners, during the negotiations so that we could be updated on developments or at the end so that we could secure democratic approval for the deal. Why has this approach been adopted? Not only has it been adopted for many years — although this agreement came before the Dáil in the past — but under the current regime, this complete insulation of social partnership from the Oireachtas has been an unhealthy development. It is being copperfastened in this Bill which makes no provision for the type of participation the Oireachtas ought to have in the development of social partnership discussions. It provides solely for a token membership of the Oireachtas in a research group looking at social justice. I have no problem with the Oireachtas having representation on a research group on social justice. I have been a member of that in the past and it does useful work. However, that is not a substitute for a proper and mature relationship between the social partnership process and the Oireachtas.

It can come as no surprise that the shortcomings in the social partnership mechanism have focused on issues where there is no representation. These areas include the needs of consumers, the growth of a rip-off culture in Ireland, the role of parents, the lack of attention to the needs of children in a mature approach to economic and social policy and the ignoring of environmental issues. The latter issue is highlighted in the National Economic and Social Council's report as an area where we have not developed an understanding of the issue or an adequate system of governance in respect of it.

Social partnership has failed to deliver in respect of these issues and failed to address important challenges coherently. It is not good enough that we make arrangements today which exclude the citizen's representation from these important debates. It is not acceptable for us to make arrangements which slam the door in the face of representation for consumers, parents or those who use public services in the social partnership process. The reform of public services to deliver high-quality services has been poorly handled within the social partnership process and people recognise that. Even Ministers now concede that the way in which benchmarking was handled was inappropriate.

We need to learn from what is going wrong and we need to make social partnership a more open, transparent and legitimised process by having genuine links with elected representatives, as well as representing important interests within our community. We must combine these processes to strengthen both. It is a mistake for the Taoiseach, in both this legislation and in practice, to insist on insulating social partnership from the Oireachtas. A fair observer could not fail to notice the dramatic contrast between the public accountability of Government to the social partnership process and its public accountability to the Oireachtas.

In the case of the social partnership process, there are two implementation bodies, four research bodies and ten high-level policy committees working on issues of concern to the social partners. Ten progress reports have already been produced on an agreement which was only negotiated in the middle of 2003. There is, correctly, a very high level of accountability in this area. Contrast this with the rusty and creaky systems of accountability in this House. We produce Estimates in November which do not contain any information about what they expect to achieve and we are expected to approve them on the nod. We have no serious scrutiny of Estimates under the current process and the investigative powers of the Dáil have been severely clipped. On social conflicts one would expect the Oireachtas to resolve, the Oireachtas has been virtually eclipsed and has less and less of a role to play in this regard.

We need to reconnect social partnership, which is a crucial part of governance in this community, and the Oireachtas and strengthen both areas. The links can be mutually beneficial. I was pleased to participate in discussions with the Labour Party to produce an agreed new departure for social partnership. This new departure must recognise new challenges, introduce greater accountability in respect of the partnership mechanism and involve the Oireachtas on a more central basis. If we do that we will move forward and achieve more from social partnership than we have in the past.

Sadly, I do not see any new departure reflected in this Bill. This Bill cements a flawed system instead of examining how we can overcome these flaws and build on successes. The Bill is disappointing. The Taoiseach will have his 118 representatives and a range of different councils and groups but the dynamism needed between the citizen and social partnership will be missing. My amendment would, in a minor fashion, begin this process. If we were to go down this route, it would need to be reflected in many other amendments to this process and many ongoing changes in the way we do our work in this House and the links we have with the important social partnership process.

See this speech in context