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

Question 7: To ask the Taoiseach when he will next meet with the Social Partners; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30220/10]

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

Question 8: To ask the Taoiseach to report on the recent activities of the National Implementation Body; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30222/10]

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 9: To ask the Taoiseach when he next plans to meet social partners; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32314/10]

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

Question 10: To ask the Taoiseach the discussions he has had, if any, with trade unions, employers' representatives and others in the context of the social partnership process; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32332/10]

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

Question 11: To ask the Taoiseach the Irish membership of the EU Economic and Social Committee; the reason a position has been removed from the farming community and allocated to Bird Watch Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34962/10]

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 to 11, inclusive, together.

I met with representatives of IBEC and ICTU in July, when we discussed the budgetary situation and recent economic developments. In addition, there is ongoing engagement between each of the pillars of social partnership and officials in my Department on a range of issues. Indeed, I addressed the IBEC human resources leadership summit on 30 September. Deputies will also be aware that there is regular contact on issues of concern to the social partners through bilateral contacts and consultation structures across relevant Government Departments. The Government remains open to further appropriate discussions with all five of the social partner pillars under the ten year framework provided under Towards2016 and we believe that continued social dialogue will play an important role in maximising consensus during this period of economic instability.

In particular, the Government will be seeking the views of the social partners as we prepare a national reform programme as part of the EU 2020 process. Preliminary meetings have already taken place at official level to scope out the key areas of concern to each of the pillars and further discussions will take place over the coming months. I look forward to hearing the views of the social partners as that process develops.

Ireland has nine places on the European Economic and Social Committee, EESC, and our nominations are divided equally between the three constituent groups of the EESC, that is, employers, employees and what are known as various interests. The various interests group on the EESC comprises representatives of a wide variety of organisations, including non-governmental organisations, farmers organisations, co-operatives and non-profit associations and environmental organisations. The EESC is mandated to consider environmental issues and environmental sustainability is a key focus of European policy. Other countries have long had environmental organisation representatives among their nominees.

For the first time, Ireland's nominees to the various interests group of the EESC included a representative from the environmental pillar. This change reflects the decision which was taken by Government last year to create a fifth pillar of social partnership to represent environmental concerns and was not in response to representations received. The environmental pillar of social partnership consists of 27 organisations with a diverse range of interests. The environmental pillar selected an employee of BirdWatch Ireland as its nominee on the committee. She is a representative of the 27 organisations in the environmental pillar and environmental interests more generally. The environmental pillar representative will be able to draw on the combined capacity for economic, social and environmental research and analysis of the constituent members of the pillar and its secretariat.

The National Implementation Body, NIB, comprising Government, employer and union representatives, has played two valuable roles over recent years. First, it has exercised national level oversight of the industrial relations scene, assisting parties in actual or threatened disputes of national importance and providing a mechanism for ongoing review of trends in industrial relations in particular sectors. As part of this high-level role, it has also operated as a forum for dialogue between employers and trade unions on the broad status and conduct of industrial relations in the State.

Second, the NIB has sought to promote compliance with the terms of successive national agreements. While the operating context for such a role has changed, it is clear that engagement between Government, employers and trade unions in regard to particular industrial relations disputes can be beneficial to all parties and is in the public interest.

In recognition of that role, the Government agreed to participate with the procedures agreed between ICTU and IBEC under their Protocol for the Orderly Conduct of Industrial Relations and Local Bargaining in the Private Sector. This protocol provides for the continuation of tripartite engagement to oversee industrial peace and stability, and is to be reviewed by the parties at the end of 2010.

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

I want to ask the Taoiseach about the recent revelations on the SIPTU national health and local authority levy fund account, which had €2.7 million transferred into it between 2002 and 2009. The latest revelations indicate that perhaps some social partnership funds were used here also. Does the Taoiseach have any information on this? Has he carried out or is he carrying out an investigation into it? I understand the HSE auditors counted 31 foreign trips across the globe. The impact of these revelations has been to cast a very poor reflection on social partnership and travelling to study social partnership in other countries. What is the story?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I cannot comment on whether any such funds mentioned by the Deputy were involved. As Deputy Kenny knows, the question is being looked at by the Committee of Public Accounts and when we have that outcome and that from the two relevant Departments and the HSE, when the facts and circumstances are known, there will be an opportunity for everyone to look at the situation based on the facts as established.

Clearly, as I and the Minister for Health and Children have emphasised, any potential waste of public funds is a serious matter. Deputies are aware of the ongoing investigations into these matters and should await a full and proper analysis of the issues and allow the Committee of Public Accounts to consider these issues based on the fullest possible set of facts.

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

I understand the Comptroller and Auditor General did his report and the Committee of Public Accounts is looking at this. However, there are two fundamental elements which are relevant to the Taoiseach's Department. He should be able to confirm that nobody from the Department of the Taoiseach travelled on any of these social partnership investigation trips and he should certainly be able to ascertain whether any social partnership funds were used.

Séamus Kirk (Louth, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am not sure questions on this matter are contemplated under this series of questions.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If the Deputy puts down a question on it I can answer it with accuracy and certainty.

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

Fine.

The Croke Park agreement came about following a request from the Government for reforms following cuts in levels of pay. Since the Croke Park agreement was ratified in June no efficiencies or savings have been made. For example, in education on which there was a great deal of discussion, the Public Service Agreement 2010-2014 agreed that by the start of the 2010-11 school year there would be the introduction of an additional hour per week to facilitate teachers to engage in duties determined by school management; an extra hour per week in institutes of technology and universities; ensuring that post-primary teachers are available for three timetabled class periods per week under the supervision and substitution scheme; a review and revision of teaching contracts; a review and revision of the employment terms and conditions of special needs assistants for those employed in the VEC sector; and a review of the academic employment contracts for institutes of technology by 31 August 2010.

This is one area where there was a great deal of discussion and argument and eventually agreement, but the Government has sat on its hands completely. Nothing has happened in respect of implementing the efficiencies contained in the Croke Park agreement. What has been the big blockage to implementing agreements that were hard fought, hard worked out and negotiated before the agreement was concluded? Why has there been no impetus in the context of a more effective service and implementing the conditions agreed in Croke Park? Why has there been no Government impetus, urgency or initiative about this to show everybody that an agreement like this can take place in the interests of those who work in the public service and those who receive the services those public servants are able to deliver?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is being driven by an implementation body which has arranged to obtain from the various Departments, agencies and offices action plans for the purposes of proceeding to implementation in the coming weeks and months. In the meantime, significant work on the transformation programme is ongoing in all sectors and savings continue to be delivered against a background of falling numbers. I am confident that the implementation of these action plans will deliver the type of changes which are required to secure cost savings, minimise the impacts of current resource constraints on service quality and availability, and improve services through the use of technology and other means. It is true to say also that in the context of Estimates decisions that are being made, and where resources will be allocated, these changes will become clearly required and the implementation body is facilitating that engagement.

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

The Taoiseach is correct in that he is confident that these changes will bring about greater efficiencies and a more effective service. On the educational block of the Croke Park agreement to which I referred, however, none of those elements have been implemented and the agreement stated clearly that these would take effect from the start of the academic year 2010-11. Being confident is one thing but having the drive to put it through is something else.

In respect of the agreement itself, as the Taoiseach will be aware, my party accepted the pay element of the Croke Park agreement, although with a different view in respect of the provision of infrastructure, for instance, in respect of our NewERA programme. When does the Taoiseach expect that the changes agreed within the Croke Park agreement will start to take place or is this a situation where the Government does not intend to do anything about it?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is important to point out that the education situation, where the ASTI recently accepted the agreement and the TUI rejected it, involves having to deal with that issue. That is on of the reasons some of the aspects on education have been delayed. We will be insisting that the agreements we reach will be implemented but there has been an IR issue in the background which must be dealt with.

With regard to the Croke Park agreement itself, it sets out the short-term, medium-term and longer-term issues that are being dealt with and the structural changes that must be implemented. All of the agreement, as negotiated, has been agreed in good faith and needs to be implemented in good faith.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The formal social partnership arrangements were contained in the document Towards 2016 which was subsequently revised and called Towards 2016: Review and Transitional Agreement. Do those two documents still apply? Are those still live and operational and does the Government consider itself to be bound by the terms of those agreements?

In respect of the implementation body set up to oversee the implementation of the measures contained in the Croke Park agreement, there was a reply from the Minister for Finance to Dáil questions on Thursday last in which we were told that the implementation body held three meetings since it was established and that it was concentrating on the implementation of the agreement, including putting in place the structures at sectoral level and seeking from public service management their action plans for the implementation of the provisions of the agreement. What Departments have submitted action plans for the implementation of the provisions of the agreement?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

With regard to the Deputy's first question, the ten-year agreement framework within which we operate social partnership continues to apply. Like all social partnership agreements, this process takes account of the budgetary situation as it develops. It is on the basis of maintaining and providing for stability and a good public finance position that these arrangements are entered into. Those are what are being implemented.

I do not have the detail of each departmental office but I understand responses have now been received from all sectors - Departments and offices - and will be reviewed by the implementation body in the coming weeks. Therefore, the answer to the Deputy's question appears to be that all the responses are in.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Two questions arise from the Taoiseach's reply. When was the last time there was a meeting together of all the social partners or all the main elements of the social partnership arrangement, namely of Government, employer bodies and trade unions in particular?

Second, with regard to the action plans being made by Departments, do I understand correctly that the proposals to which the Taoiseach referred are the action plans for the implementation of the provision of the Croke Park agreement and that those action plans have now been submitted to the implementation body? Will he outline what will now happen to those action plans? Is it the case that they have to be agreed within the context of the implementation body and the procedures that have been set down for dealing with them?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not have the date the last plenary session of the social partnership process was held. I will have to get that for the Deputy.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Was it in the past year?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thought so but I will have to check that. There have been meetings with the various social partners in various guises at different times but not all together. There have been a number of meetings. The last one with the business and employer pillar was on 19 July. The one with the trade union pillar was on 16 July. The one with the farming pillar was on 4 February. I met representatives of the ICMSA on 22 July and I am due to speak at its annual meeting on 29 October. Officials from my Department met representatives of the IFA on 29 July and I am due to meet them on 26 October. I last met the farming pillar as a whole on 27 October 2009. Officials from my Department met the community and voluntary pillar on 23 July - the previous meeting was held on 8 June in regard to the EU 2020 process. I last met representatives of the environmental pillar on 27 October 2009 and, similarly, I last met representatives of the community and voluntary pillar then. Department officials met representatives of the environmental pillar 23 July in regard to the EU 2020 process. The detail deals with one aspect of the Deputy's question.

As I said, the information I have to hand is that action plans have all been submitted. The implementation body will review those over the coming weeks and ascertain what way it can put them into place based on contacts between both sides of industry.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If the only meetings that have taken place on social partnership have been effectively bilateral meetings between the Government and individual components of the social partnership arrangement, and there has not been a plenary meeting in recent times - clearly, the Taoiseach cannot remember when there was last a plenary meeting of the social partnership process - is it not fair to say that social partnership, certainly as we used to know it, is pretty well over?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not accept that.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will also take a final question from Deputy Ó Caoláin.

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

Will the Taoiseach confirm that the Minister for Finance, Deputy Brian Lenihan, told the Irish Congress of Trade Unions on 4 October that the Government intends to comply with the terms of the Croke Park agreement on pay and reform of the public service? Will he confirm the assurances contained in the agreement that pay and pensions would not - I emphasise the words "would not" - be further cut and there would be no compulsory redundancies in the public service in return for flexibility in redeployment terms in the public service? Will he give a clear commitment that nothing in the forthcoming budget will be in breach of the Government's position on the Croke Park agreement?

On the ESRI recommendations vis-À-vis an across-the-board social charge, does the Taoiseach agree that this is a regressive proposal which will favour higher income earners at the expense of lower income earners? Will he state that it will not be contemplated by the Government?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Obviously, I cannot discuss the budget with the Deputy. On the Croke Park agreement, those who support the agreement and are anxious to implement it are anxious to work on the basis of the agreement as are those who have supported it and had the benefits that derive from it. That is the position on that matter.

On the Deputy's question on the issue of a social charge, the Minister indicated in his previous budget that he was preparing proposals on how he could bring about a situation in which the various levies and PRSI could be looked at in an integrated way for the future. Many people on low incomes are excluded from the tax net. This is about providing a sustainable way forward to ensure that the benefits of the commitments and social taxes are provided for in future with the demographics we have.