Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Acting Chairman for the opportunity to speak to this new legislation, the Public Service Management (Recruitment and Appointments) (Amendment) Bill 2013. I welcome the debate because it is important to look closely at the area of mobility and barriers to redeployment in the public service. It is also important to commend and pay tribute to the vast majority of our public servants, who have made and are making a remarkable contribution in the country as a whole. It is not popular or trendy nowadays to stand up for many of our public servants but today I will do so. They have taken the hits and the cuts and many on the front line have also taken much abuse. They have always done their best, in many cases, against the odds, and it is important that this is recognised in the debate.

It also is important to state one can never run a country without a good and effective public service. While some in the broader world appear to believe one can, for me the public service is the engine room at the heart of any state or country that wishes to serve, protect and defend its citizens. That is what this Bill should be about and is what any decent society also should be about. Public service is about serving the public whether one is a teacher, a nurse, a civil servant, a garda, a doctor or a council staff member. That is the core of any country and is something one should never forget. Moreover, in the context of the current economic crisis, one should never think we can get out of this economic mess without proper participation and support from all public servants. While some may think they are strong words, this is the reality and all Members of the Oireachtas should know that.

As for the legislation under discussion, its primary aim is to remove the legislative barriers to redeployment and mobility within the public service, as well as to address other issues that arise on changing employer. In addition, to reflect the fact that open recruitment now is the norm for posts under the remit of the Top Level Appointments Commission, it also will remove the limited exemption for the general provisions of the principal Act in respect of these appointments, thereby bringing them within the ambit of the Act. These are the aims of the legislation but a more detailed consideration of the Bill reveals it also addresses a number of key policy issues that are critical to the smooth operation of mobility policy, including the definition of "public service" and "basic pay", as well as the pension arrangements to apply to an individual on transfer. The Bill makes provision for the mobility and redeployment arrangements agreed in the Croke Park agreement but does not extend beyond what was agreed therein. The successor to the Croke Park agreement, the Haddington Road agreement, restates that where deployment is not an option, there may be circumstances in which voluntary departure may be appropriate. In such situations, there will be discussions with the relevant unions on the terms of any arrangements. That is a strong section in respect of the role of unions and I welcome it because at present, there is a strong undermining within broader society of the role of trade unions. I was a member of the INTO for many years and we worked for change in respect of educational disadvantage, special needs assistants, SNAs, resource hours and issues such as class size. While we had some great successes, I now strongly believe one must be vigilant and that in particular, public servants must be vigilant.

Last night, I attended a public meeting in Ayrfield, which is in the new part of my constituency of Dublin Bay North, that was packed with teachers and parents who were concerned about the class size issue. However, in addition to being concerned about such issues and the future of education in Ireland, I was delighted to see parents and public servants attending and working together on an issue that is important to everyone. Among the issues they raised was that of resource hours for children with disabilities, which have been cut in recent years, as well as educational disadvantage. Reports emerged last night and today about the dispute with the ASTI in the middle of which the Minister, Deputy Howlin, and his colleague, the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Quinn, find themselves. While it may be trendy to kick the ASTI today, one does not isolate people who have served the country well as it will not work. Teachers have taken hits and are hurting, I accept like many other people, but they also wish to fight for education and that is their role and their belief. Kicking them around, being trendy and popular, isolating them or using words like "isolation" and so on will not help the position. I received a telephone call last Monday evening from an ASTI member on another issue and she was still in her school at 8 p.m. This goes on all the time but people forget this when they are sticking the boot into members of the ASTI. Secondary schoolteachers have served the State well for many years and have done much on a voluntary basis. Members should not cod themselves but should accept that over the past five years, the goodwill in Irish education has been damaged severely. I regularly speak to teachers on the ground and to professionals on this issue. When I left college, it was an absolute honour to take over the Cumann na mBunscol under-13 team and one received no pay for it. I was training teams in Whitehall or Fairview Park until 6 p.m. or 7 p.m. and while I loved doing it, I never got a penny for it. Many teachers did such things without seeking money or gold medals. My point is there is a strong history of goodwill in Irish education and the Minister should be extremely cautious about damaging that. I offer this as a word of warning to the Minister and anyone who deals with industrial relations also must know this.

I revert to the broader debate on what is going on with regard to this issue. The Bill amends the Public Service Management (Recruitment and Appointments) Act 2004 and as I indicated earlier, its aim is to remove the barriers to redeployment and overall mobility. I welcome this aspect of the legislation because there must be greater mobility. When I was the principal teacher in a disadvantaged school, I always told colleagues that after ten years as a principal in such a school, it was time to consider the idea of rotating that principal or of bringing in someone fresh because there are people who are interested in taking such steps. I was principal and having spent more than ten years as such, I was open to the idea of being redeployed, of doing something else or of carrying out a change. This was because while the first six or seven years in such a role are very exciting and so on, dealing with education, huge problems, social workers, parents, boards of management and all that is an extremely difficult job. I reiterate some people are open to such flexibility and mobility and I urge the Minister to give consideration to introducing this idea in the education sector as well. Serious consideration should be given to the idea that after so many years, a person may wish to change with dignity and without feeling there is a question mark hanging over his or her career.

While some colleagues disagree with me on this issue, politicians, Senators and such people also are public servants. I do not agree with some of the slogans on the Seanad referendum I have seen recently. I refer to the anti-politics and anti-politician posters that are on display. It is a populist rant and a section of opinion outside the Oireachtas simply is using the opportunity to kick politicians. Most Deputies and Senators of my acquaintance try to come in, do their work and serve the public because they are public servants. I acknowledge there has been corruption and sleaze in the past and agree there are issues like that which can be dealt with through reform but I simply do not concur with the current modern rant that everyone in society is anti-politician or anti-politics and I am disappointed to see Government parties erecting posters about getting rid of politicians and so on.

I will revert to the legislation and the points made by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD, which undertook a series of country reviews to analyse the successes and challenges of public service reform from a comprehensive perspective. In the case of Ireland, this review took into account the public service reforms adopted here since the mid-1990s. The OECD sought to deliver high-level analysis on the state of preparedness of Ireland's public service to meet future economic and social challenges and that is what this debate should be about. It pertains to modernising the public service and is about reform and change but it also is about making sure the public service is efficient and can deal with the future of this country. I reiterate that regardless of whether one is a garda, a teacher, a nurse, a social worker, a civil servant or a city council worker, such groups have made a massive contribution to the State. Sadly, successive Governments have paid insufficient attention to developing the goodwill that exists and that is the important point to remember in the course of this debate.

See this speech in context