Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)

A net point exists which must be teased out legally. School caretakers and secretaries are not public servants or public sector workers. In effect, they are temporary workers. They are not paid for the entire year; on average, they work approximately 40 weeks. They are not paid from the pay side of the public purse. Their pay comes from the capitation grant, as the Minister is well aware, and they are low-paid.

Why has the Minister insisted that 4% must be reduced under the capitation grant which, in many cases, goes to pay for these people?. The Minister does not reduce the capitation grant. On the one hand, the Minister maintains the schools are the employers and she provides a capitation grant to enable them to run their affairs. However, the Minister then interferes with the employment contract between the school and the caretaker or the secretary by declaring unilaterally that there must be a 4% cut in the pay of the caretakers, without any saving on the capitation grant. This is simply a lazy, bureaucratic across-the-board slash and burn exercise. There is no rationale to it. Let us think of it logically. The capitation grant remains untouched. Through a circular, an instruction goes to the schools to the effect that payment to a caretaker must be reduced. No saving accrues to the Department. This relates to a low-paid person. Since someone in the Department has been too lazy to think through the logic of the Minister's relationship with the school, the board of management and the capitation grant, someone has simply applied the cut to all categories. These are not public sector workers. Does the Minister not agree that the belt and braces approach in the emergency financial measures legislation which we have just enacted has given her some degree of cover? Whatever the legal cover, it has no logical cover. The Minister will not save any money as a result of this measure but she will impose hardship.

See this speech in context