Noel Harrington (Cork South West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I have to wonder what is the purpose of this motion given it is proposed by the last people in this House qualified to say anything credible about public servants and sustainable pay, conditions and work practices - those in Fianna Fáil. The hypocrisy, as I see it, is that the previous Government in dealing with any proposal surrounding public service pay and conditions simply capitulated and threw taxpayers' money at whatever the issue of the day presented. The complex nature of delivering public service reform while at the same time negotiating fair pay rates for all scales and sectors of the public sector was a bridge too far and too challenging for a Government led by the only self-proclaimed real socialist in town, for too long ably assisted by some of his back-slapping yes-men, some of whom had the temerity to put their names to this motion.

The measures that his Government put forward could only be described as short-sighted, basic and, ultimately, far too expensive for a country whose economy would shortly run aground. The benchmarking process and ultimate agreement is a classic example of the absentee leadership that typified Government policy from 1997 until 2011. This, and the introduction of a myriad of different allowances and payments for different posts and sectors, left the public pay regime unintelligible to the most forensic examination to a point where even the workers cannot tell what is core pay and what is an allowance. Schemes like Better Local Government, the arrival of the HSE and the debacle that became the decentralisation ego trip have all contributed to a more expensive, top heavy and less efficient public service that had to be addressed. I should add that flat percentage payment increases during this free-for-all created greater inequality among our public servants and left a much greater gap between those at the top and those at the bottom of the scale of public service workers. Of course, one would have needed vision, understanding and courage to have done it differently.

The sacrifices the men and women of the public service have made in recent years have been particularly difficult but this has led to a more efficient public service which is becoming fit for purpose. I also note that much of this pain was taken on without any industrial action whatsoever. This is commendable, unlike the motive behind this motion. The Government recognised this in adopting the Labour Relations Commission's recommendations that the highest paid public servants, those earning more than €65,000, would be hit first and hardest. Little wonder their union came out as strongly against as it did.

One of the main issues that surfaced during the negotiations directly affected those earning more than €35,000 but less than €65,000. The basic pay was to remain untouched but some allowances would have been affected. I previously mentioned the monkey's fist of the remuneration regime agreed by the previous Administration, and unravelling this is naturally complex and confusing. Those earning less than €35,000 would not have their pay affected high up or low down. I believe it is fair that they would be asked to participate in reforming the services where modest changes to work practices would be on the table.

I should state the cost of public sector salaries is now nearly €19 billion of Government expenditure. I would combine this with the cost of the total expenditure on social welfare at nearly €20 billion of gross Government expenditure. Some 90% of private sector workers in this country are looking at these figures with concern. They are struggling from day to day just to retain their jobs in challenging sectors such as, for example, retail and construction. In quoting this, we must also remember the 250,000 people who lost their jobs as a result of Fianna Fáil's direct and disastrous Government policies. It is difficult not to reflect that all of our collective focus should be on getting these people back to work.

I have spoken to people who voted against the agreement. They accept that cuts were necessary and they even accept that they themselves would have to contribute again. However, one person pointed out to me that, like turkeys that know Christmas is coming, why would they vote for it?

I note the motion specifically calls for engagement, no legislation and full disclosure. Talk about a conversion from a party that previously acted unilaterally to cut pay levels. It is a pity when the economy was roaring that some of the same signatories did not recognise that modest reform and more nuanced corrections could have achieved so much. The inevitable departure of the Celtic tiger left them completely baffled and totally at a loss as it arrived despite their policies and they did not have a clue where it came from in the first place.

All the evidence leads to one conclusion, namely, that Fianna Fáil ran this country with only one objective in mind - that of buying elections with taxpayers' money. Its former leader even claimed so in the Dáil. No one on this or any side of the House who was elected in the last election wants to impose pay cuts on anyone, whether in the public or private sector, but the precipice the taxpayers were facing when Fianna Fáil left office left us with no choice when the troika came in to explain and tell us how a country should be governed.

Those opposite need to reassess their options. The old method of opposing the Government for the sake of opposition is not going to work. They need to come forward with responsible alternatives that will get Ireland back to work again. This motion does not do that. I will be supporting the Government's amendment to this motion.

See this speech in context