Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

It did not exist. For some time, we have been calling for a mechanism to be found for letting the group into the talks, given that its members were affected by them. Pensions were cut disproportionately for those with higher incomes. While they are saying that the changes in the legislation are welcome, the Alliance of Retired Public Servants continues to have concerns.

They accept that in January 2016, some €400 will be returned to most pensioners affected by the public service pension reduction, with a further €500 to be returned in 2017 and a further €780 to be returned in 2018. While that will benefit most of those affected by the public service pension reduction, there will continue to be a group that will not be free of its impact. I tabled parliamentary questions to the Minister for Public Enterprise and Reform last week seeking to know whether he would consider the points made by the alliance. The reply, which came from the Minister for Finance, made it clear that no further changes are envisaged. The alliance sought a meeting with the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation and a separate meeting with the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection. Both Ministers replied by saying they were not prepared to agree to meet the alliance, which was very disappointing. The alliance is disappointed because it feels that in a democracy, its numbers should at least entitle it to a meeting. It was essentially told in the parliamentary reply I received through the Minister's officials that the Minister is well aware of these matters. The Ministers, Deputies Bruton and Burton, have said they are well aware of the issues of concern to the group and those issues have been noted. That was not satisfactory from the point of view of the alliance. I would like this aspect of the matter to be dealt with in advance of Committee Stage.

It is welcome that we are starting this process. Everybody here needs to be careful and not reckless. We cannot unwind everything in the FEMPI legislation. There are people in this House who think that as part of the unwinding of the FEMPI legislation, all the money that was deducted over the past five years should be handed back in back pay. All I can say is that I was almost knocked over when I heard that request. I said upfront that this was the biggest ask ever to be put to me. We are where we are. It seems that pay and pensions will be restored in due course. It is to be hoped that some of those who will not benefit immediately from the unwinding of this legislation will benefit down the road. It is too much to ask for the reinstatement in the form of back pay of everything that was deducted since 2009. I have to put that on the record. I would support the restoration of pay and pensions in an orderly and constructive manner as long as the cost of meeting our obligations does not affect this country's competitiveness.

I concede that we are still in a very difficult financial situation with regard to one issue. I am not speaking about the national debt, which is generally coming under control. We are going to be heading to European average figures very soon. I refer instead to the level of personal debt associated with people's high mortgages and negative equity. I would consider that to be our biggest debt issue. When the Government got a big national debt under control in previous recessions, the country got going more quickly. It is taking a little longer on this occasion because of the high level of debt associated with people having to pay expensive mortgages and being in negative equity. Many of the people in question are public servants, although many of them are not. I issued a statement in advance of these talks saying that any increase in public service pay should be done in tandem with pay increases in the private sector. The public sector should not run ahead of the private sector and should not lag behind the private sector. That is why we recommended in the submission we made when the Low Pay Commission was looking at the situation that the increase in the minimum wage should come in at the same time as these increases. We did not know the date. We probably said it should happen in January 2016. The increase in the minimum wage for those in the private sector is being made in January 2016. The increases under this legislation and the Lansdowne Road agreement are commencing in January 2016. That is right. At the beginning of this process, I called for those increases to happen in tandem. There has to be a bit of cohesion in society. It would be very wrong for one group to run ahead of or lag behind the other group. I do not think there is anyone in the public sector on the minimum wage, by and large. Maybe they are not all on the living wage, but certainly none of them is on the minimum wage. The increase in the minimum wage will benefit people in the private sector and this will benefit people in the public sector. It will be good for people to feel there is some improvement in their financial circumstances. They can look forward to an eventual declaration by a Minister that the financial emergency is over. I hope this will happen as soon as possible. Maybe it will happen in June of next year, although I do not know who will be the relevant Minister then.

See this speech in context