Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)

I thank all the Deputies who contributed to the debate. I do not agree with everything that was said, but I agree that we should have more time to deal with these provisions. I will strive in future to ensure sufficient time is available for debate. The problem is that we are running into the budgetary timeframe and a great deal of legislation is backlogged. This Bill is not controversial in and of itself. We had an opportunity to discuss most of its provisions in the context of the debate on the Public Service Pensions (Single Scheme) and Remuneration Bill 2011, which has passed Second Stage. Thus, we have already had one iteration of the issues involved.

This is very unusual legislation, comprising financial emergency measures in the public interest. In fact, it is only the fourth Bill of its kind. It underscores, as I said in my opening remarks, the dire circumstances facing this country. Notwithstanding Deputy Mattie McGrath's congratulations on implementing these measures, I would not have wished to be among the first Ministers, following my immediate predecessor, to bring in legislation to reduce people's pay. Nobody wants to do that. The legislation before us is part of the corpus of so-called FEMPI legislation. It is not designed exclusively to secure a wodge of money that will solve our economic problems. Rather, it is designed, as many of the Deputies outlined, to engender a sense of social solidarity, a sense that those with the broadest shoulders will carry the greatest burden. People tend to be timid and the legal advice is often very robust in urging that these things should not be done. One can be weighed down, as I am weighed down, with advices on contract law, that one cannot do this or that. We want the measures we introduce to be as robust as possible.

From the very minute we were elected we genuinely tried to inculcate a notion of fairness by capping the Taoiseach's salary at €200,000 and setting that as the pinnacle of public service pay. That we have succeeded in only a few months in implementing that across the Civil Service is a remarkable achievement in itself. If those concerned had told us to take a hike, there would have been nothing we could do contractually. There is a crudeness about imposing a cap. As I said bluntly at the time I introduced the cap in the commercial semi-State sector - and it might have been unfortunate that I did so - the chief executive officer of Bord na gCon does not have the same responsibilities as the chief executive officer of the ESB. There must be some relativity if we are to attract people to do these jobs.

Several Deputies opposite suggested that there be a general cap of €100,000. There is a ready listening ear for such proposals on the part of the many people in this country who are badly hurting. They might argue that €100,000 is a great deal of money. In truth, however, if I were to introduce such a cap, we would not have cardiac surgeons, cancer specialists, research specialists, people who drive industry or people working in Departments who are of the highest quality. Science Foundation Ireland would not attract research fellows into our universities. We must be honest with people in this regard. It is not only about a model of fairness, important as that is, but also a model of growth. We must ensure the economy has the capacity to attract and retain people of ability, rather than driving them out of the country.

Deputy Sean Fleming queried why the Bill does not apply the mandatory cut to all incumbent public servants. The Bill deals with those public servants whose pay is set out in legislation. Anybody with whom we can deal administratively has already been dealt with and those pay rates apply. The Deputy also asked whether Secretaries General are still on the higher rates of pay. On the day I announced the cap all Secretaries General volunteered to reduce their pay to the €200,000 threshold. For the A1 Secretaries General, that represented a very significant reduction. Two years ago they were earning an additional €85,000, which is a fair whack of a reduction. They are still earning an awful lot of money, but when one has made lifestyle commitments and so on, agreeing voluntarily to forgo 30% of salary in one go is significant and should be acknowledged. I am not saying we have already done enough. This is a process and we will take further action.

Deputy Fleming also raised the issue of high-level rates of pay in the National Treasury Management Agency. I have raised that transparency issue and it is a matter to which we will return. Deputy Mary Lou McDonald spoke about the President's pay. That is set in the Constitution at 10% above the rate of pay of the Chief Justice. Until we secured the constitutional change on the Chief Justice's pay, we could not adjust the pay of the President. However, the President has taken a voluntary waiver of 23% of pay.

There is a great deal more I would like to say but the Ceann Comhairle has indicated that my time is up. Perhaps I will get a chance during the short Committee Stage to deal with some of the other valuable and important points made.

See this speech in context