Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 10: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on the implementation of the programme for Government; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6756/07]

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 11: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on those aspects of the programme for Government for which his Department is responsible; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6757/07]

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 12: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on the implementation of the programme for Government; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8362/07]

Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 13: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on the progress to date in implementing An Agreed Programme for Government. [8941/07]

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 14: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on the implementation of the programme for Government as it affects his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9645/07]

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 15: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on the implementation of An Agreed Programme for Government; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11370/07]

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 10 to 15, inclusive, together.

Progress on the implementation of the Government programme is kept under review. Deputies will be aware that on the completion of each full year that Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats have been in Government, we have published an annual progress report that sets out progress to date in implementing every commitment in the programme for Government.

The last edition of the Government progress report was published in July 2005. It was decided to defer publication of a report in 2006 and instead to publish a final progress report in 2007, giving a full account of the achievements of this Government in implementing the programme. This final report will give a more complete picture of the Government's level of delivery over almost the entirety of its term of office. It is the responsibility of each Minister to ensure the commitments in the programme that fall within his or her portfolio are fully implemented.

The Department of the Taoiseach derives its mandate from my role as Head of Government. As such, it is involved to some degree in virtually all aspects of the work of Government. It provides support to me as Taoiseach and to the Government through the Government secretariat, the Cabinet committee system and through its involvement in key policy areas and initiatives.

The current key strategic priorities of the Department are set out in its strategy statement. They include Northern Ireland, EU and international affairs, economic and social policy, social partnership, public service modernisation and the information society and e-government. Both I and the Ministers of State in my Department answer questions in the House on these issues. In all of its work, my Department works closely with other Departments and offices. Individual Ministers are answerable to the House in respect of their specific areas of responsibility.

The key areas for which my Department is responsible in terms of An Agreed Programme for Government can be broadly summarised as follows: supporting the development and implementation of social partnership, working with the British Government and the parties in Northern Ireland to achieve the implementation of the Good Friday Agreement in all its aspects, co-ordinating the e-government initiative to bring about an expansion in the range and quality of online Government services and ensuring that Ireland's key objectives in the European Union are carried forward in the context of my role as a member of the European Council.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

With regard to the requirement of the Taoiseach's Department to oversee the implementation of social partnership, in which the Taoiseach has had a long involvement, I made the point some years ago that a one-size-fits-all benchmarking process leading to social partnership does not fit all circumstances. The current work to rule by nurses is in full swing and in this respect nurses, patients and taxpayers will all suffer. Obviously, intransigence on either side can lead to stalemate, to more serious action or to a situation where everybody loses. With regard to responsibility to oversee implementation of social partnership, what is the role of the Taoiseach's Department in setting sufficiently flexible criteria under the benchmarking process to allow for matters to be put on the table that could be negotiated and discussed and which could lead to the social partnership criteria being fulfilled?

In other words, there is a problem today with 40,000 nurses and the negotiation process cannot even get started. The point I made three years ago was that the benchmarking process was not sufficiently flexible to cater for such circumstances. Does the Taoiseach's Department have a responsibility or role in opening up the criteria for negotiation so those with legitimate grievances, from whatever sector, are able to say the process allows them to put their grievances on the table and discuss them? Is this possible if, for example, the nursing organisations say they are prepared to change practices and become more efficient etc., leaving aside the two fundamental issues at stake from their point of view? If they cannot get through the starting gate to discuss these things, what is the responsibility of the Taoiseach's Department in so far as broadening the criteria for benchmarking is concerned?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In general, the criteria, the terms of reference and operation of benchmarking are worked out between management and unions. That has already been done and worked out for the next round of benchmarking. There are many difficulties in this particular case. First, some of the nurses, the INO and PNA, have not signed up to Towards 2016, while those who are members of SIPTU have. The Labour Court has made its position clear that the issue is a matter for the benchmarking process. The criteria have already been worked out for the next round of benchmarking and both the union and management sides have had a role in fixing those criteria. Their position has been agreed and that is part of the problem, that it is an agreed position between both sides.

There are several issues involved. On the issue of the 35-hour week, this could have been discussed between management and union sides if it arose at the benchmarking discussions. My people and others tried hard in the national implementation body, NIB, discussions over the past three weeks to make progress on the issue, and did make some progress. The issue of the pay anomaly is also related to the situation. It arises as a result of pay adjustments for nurses and midwives and affects a small number of people. I believe it can be resolved.

The big issue is the 10.6% pay increase demand. We have no mechanism to resolve that because it flies in the face of the overall pay agreement. There are possibilities in the other areas — other people worked hard for three weeks to achieve that position. The Labour Court has recommended that the issue can be dealt with only through benchmarking. The national implementation body, NIB, despite all its efforts over the past three weeks, was unable to find an alternative solution.

The dilemma in which we find ourselves is that conceding the nurses' demand on pay would spell the end of pay policy, the collapse of the arrangements made not just with the rest of the public service, but with workers generally across the economy. That is the issue we cannot resolve. This is not the fault of benchmarking but is due to the fact that we have a national agreement and we cannot have two.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am focused on the responsibility and role of the Taoiseach's Department in overseeing the implementation of social partnership. The NIB met for three weeks but not much progress was made there. If the Labour Court states that benchmarking is the way forward, what is the Department's role in making the criteria sufficiently flexible, given that the Irish Nurses Organisation and the Psychiatric Nurses Association have not signed on to social partnership? If they understand that the issues they raise regarding efficiency and change of work practices should be dealt with in the benchmarking process, does the Department have a role in making the criteria more flexible given that the NIB was unable to make progress?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Labour Court and the NIB have reached the view that the issue can be dealt with under the benchmarking process. Nobody can predetermine the outcome but the Labour Court and the NIB tried to see if there was a helpful way of moving the discussion forward for three weeks and concluded that the only way to deal with this was within the benchmarking process.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is the Taoiseach saying that the nurses' dispute may be resolved only within the benchmarking system?

There are many big ticket items in the programme for Government that have not been achieved. However, there is one that was not in the programme but the Government seems hell-bent on achieving it, judging by the pressure being applied to professionals to sign off on contracts for the building of super private clinics on the grounds of public hospitals. I understand the deadline of 16 April cannot be met but does the Government still intend, notwithstanding the opposition of so many of the Deputies behind the Taoiseach, to sign off on these contracts to build super private clinics on scarce public land?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

For the past three weeks under the NIB, officials of my Department, the Department of Health and Children and the management of the Health Service Executive tried to resolve this issue. A reduction to a 35-hour week, however, would represent a massive change in working arrangements, involving a reduction of 7.7 million nursing hours. That cannot be undertaken lightly. They endeavoured to find a way to do this on a cost-neutral basis. To be fair to the nurses' unions, they are open to doing that but they could not find a way to do so outside the benchmarking process. They want a final date before they discuss how the change can be effected on a cost-neutral basis. Those in negotiations on the management side rightly want to find out how this will be done and to work out a logical sequence. Everyone knows it cannot be done in a short period. It will take some time but we are prepared to make moves to start it. That must be done first, otherwise everyone has to work out how to achieve it before the final date and that is not possible.

The pay adjustment for nurses and midwives is not a major issue providing that is not treated as a relativity and does not have a knock-on effect for everybody. Only 44 people are affected by the relativity and the nurses' position is they want it extended to 40,000 people. It is a little different trying to square that but the issue can still be resolved because if there is an anomaly, the pay increase should be confined to those who suffered the anomaly and it should not have a knock-on effect. Progress can be made on that.

The Government cannot award a 10.5% increase outside the agreement and thereby break the agreement and the entire procedure involving public service workers. However, within the parameters of last week's discussions, working out the 35-hour week is a possibility. That could not be agreed last week and we will continue reflecting on that issue.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That concludes Taoiseach's Questions. We now move on to questions to the Minister for Transport.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach was in mid-reply.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Ceann Comhairle indicated I would be called.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Has the Taoiseach concluded?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I refer to Deputy Rabbitte's other question. Negotiations on the other contracts are ongoing with the HSE and I do not have an update on that.