Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

In regard to Question No. 5, there have been conflicting messages emanating from the Government over the past months in terms of negotiations with the public service and wage talks in general. The Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, has been saying fairly consistently that there will not be any wage increases. Labour Party Ministers are falling over themselves saying there will be increases. The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Howlin, who is verbally dexterous, continually speaks about what might happen in 2018 and 2019. In this regard, he has even referred to 2020. In other words, if one looks over the rainbow things might happen. The Minister, Deputy Howlin, also has great confidence in his political future and that of his party in that he believes they will be determining these issues in 2019.

One gets the feeling that there is political positioning going on as opposed to any real action on content or substance. The low pay commission was mentioned. The Tánaiste was elected as leader of the Labour Party last July, at which time she trumpeted the low pay commission as a significant catalyst for change.

What is happening is that we are now talking about the end of February before the commission will be established, while "by the end of summer", as I know from previous experience, the Government means the end of September or even October. In reality, nothing will happen on this issue during the lifetime of the Government.

The Taoiseach’s claim that it never happened before is not correct. Legislatively, the Labour Court had the facility to determine the minimum wage, for example, when the trade unions and employers could never agree. In the past decade there were successive increases in the minimum wage as a result of this legislative mechanism. Inevitably in such cases the Labour Court would rule in favour of an increase and, accordingly, split the difference between the trade unions and employers.

The Government needs to firm up on what will happen in the next 12 months because there is much posturing. For example, two years ago gardaí were being screwed on allowances. Eventually, the Government gave in and the allowances on which gardaí had depended were restored. Yesterday we saw the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and the Minister at a parade in the Garda College in Templemore. By the way, yesterday’s event dangerously politicised the Garda. While I accept that Ministers can attend these events, looking at the photographs I had the sense that an election was coming. The Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection would not normally attend graduation ceremonies at Templemore, as that is the role of the Minister for Justice and Equality. No matter what is going on, the Labour Party must have a nominal person at such events just for the photo opportunity. The Taoiseach might smile, but that is the reality.

The more substantial point is that there has been a growing casualisation of the workforce with zero hour contracts. Young people, in particular, have been affected most by this dramatic change. In most developed western economies there has been a reduction in incomes and a decrease in wages. In this economy there has been an actual income reduction when one looks at Central Statistics Office figures and so forth. There has been much commentary internationally that the middle class is shrinking. When one talks about competitiveness, it always seems to mean wage reductions. There is a fundamentally changed dynamic in this regard, one which I do not believe the low pay commission has within its remit. It should not just be about the minimum wage but also the fundamental issue of the role of the State in incomes policy and ensuring the gap between rich and poor does not grow exponentially, as it has and continues to do. The work of Thomas Piketty is instructive on what is going on in this regard. Corporations all over the world are telling national governments to make their workforces more competitive. These very corporations are prepared to make fortunes on the backs of a dollar a day workers in other jurisdictions, while expecting those in more developed and affluent economies to purchase their goods on reduced wages. I accept that these are global issues, but I am not clear on whether the Government has a strategy or, as a state, we have properly interrogated the challenges of globalisation, its impact on wage structures within the economy and our society. Over 600,000 people in the economy earn less than €30,000 per annum, a figure that is growing. In Britain a recent report showed that the average wage for somebody coming out of university was €15,000. The issues are job quality, pay levels and the activities that can attract high value jobs that can enable people to aspire to reasonable remuneration in key sectors of the economy. This applies to financial services and technology, as well as trades.

The Taoiseach has stated the commission will have three union representatives who understand the issue of low pay, three employers and two labour market experts. In essence, it will be a kind of revamped Labour Relations Commission or a Labour Court type of commission that will arbitrate on the minimum wage. The issue, however, is far more profound. We need to go hard on the casualisation of the workforce. There needs to be proper engagement with corporations, companies and employers. It is also in their interests that we have a productive workforce that can aspire to progression and a decent wage that will enable them to participate in the economy.

There is a need for a more enhanced social dialogue. The teacher strikes this year would not have happened if there had been proper dialogue. The former Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Ruairí Quinn, simply ignored the recommendations of the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment and decided, unilaterally, that there would be 100% self-assessment in schools. He announced that he would ram this through and drove the teachers wild. The teachers, rightly so, were angry and now there is residual and embedded opposition to junior cycle reform because of this ham-fisted, absence-of-dialogue approach to dealing with the social partners and valuable stakeholders in education. His successor, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, must now pick up the pieces.

The Government has been pretending to all and sundry that it can now do everything again. Every morning, when one opens a newspaper, one sees the latest initiative for this, that and the other. I added all of the commitments announced by 13 January and the figure came to €3.4 billion. There have been more since. The Taoiseach needs to get real with the people in that not all of these can happen. There is a value in determining priorities with the social partners. Is it the deprivation index about which we all heard last week for children living in poverty? Is it about the inability of people to put a roof over their heads? Should we change the rent cap or the rent allowance regime which has pushed many families into homelessness? Is it about the health service in which there are over 502 patients on hospital trolleys today, in which waiting lists are going through the roof and in which many elderly people are waiting for a fair deal scheme place? Is it about education, with special needs children having proper access to therapies? The Taoiseach needs to be straight with the people. He cannot pretend to promise everything, but that is what is happening. I get the sense that the engagement with the social partners is choreographed and orchestrated with a eye on the next general election. There is no beef or substance to it.

See this speech in context