Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

1. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the changes he is considering to his position on public sector pay and conditions as outlined in the Croke Park 2 draft agreement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24892/13]

Mary Lou McDonald (Dublin Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

2. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if his Department officials have completed their preparation on legislative measures to reduce the public sector pay and pensions bill; and when he intends to publish this legislation. [24804/13]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together. This afternoon, I published the proposed Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Bill 2013 and the Bill is scheduled to come before the Oireachtas on Tuesday. The primary purpose of the proposed legislation is to implement the proposed pay reduction for public servants earning annual salaries of €65,000 or more and the parallel reduction in public service pensions over €32,500. Contingency measures to be deployed to secure reductions in the public service pay and pensions bill are also included, including provision for a universal freeze on pay increments. The legislation will also provide a facility for unions and representative associations to conclude collective agreements with their public service employers, which will avoid the need for those contingency measures to be used.

Amended proposals for collective agreements were brokered by the Labour Relations Commission in discussions between the parties on terms and conditions of public servants, which concluded on Monday morning last. I pay tribute to all those involved in the discussions, particularly the officers of the Labour Relations Commission, led by the chief executive Kieran Mulvey, the unions and their representatives, representative associations and public service employers, for their expertise and engagement on what was a very difficult agenda for all concerned.

The Government recognises the savings sought from the public service pay and pensions bill are extremely difficult and challenging for all public servants. The Government is conscious of the significant contributions made to the recovery of the State by public servants. They are a necessary further contribution to the fiscal consolidation process required to restore our economic sovereignty and bring our current expenditure deficit under control. It has also always been the ambition of mine, and the Government, to have an agreement on achieving the savings with our employees and their unions. If these proposals are accepted, achieving the required savings and major increases in public service productivity to secure the necessary reduction in the public service pay and pension bill will be possible. The essential elements and protections of the Croke Park agreement will remain in place. Industrial peace in the public service can be secured at a critical time on our path to economic sovereignty.

Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The questions we had tabled for today related to the pay talks and have been gazumped by the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Bill which was published at 1 p.m. That is the essence of what we are now discussing.

My question asked about the changes in the legislation that were not in the rejected Croke Park II deal. The Minister said that was the best deal in town. I presume the Minister was sincere when he said that but he has moved on to a new deal. Is this a better deal and was the last deal not the best deal in town? Perhaps the Minister can explain why he has had a change in that regard.

The Minister pays tribute to those involved in negotiations. Can he talk to me about the involvement of retired public servants in the agreement process? My understanding is that they were not involved in the first process. The same paragraph is in the new agreement as was rejected earlier. The special legislation has major sections dealing with the reduction of pay of retired public servants who were not part of the deal. I cannot understand how the Minister is thanking people for their co-operation when he ensured they were not part of the process. Nevertheless, he is coming to take pay from the pensioners by way of emergency legislation. The Minister should explain the involvement they had.

The Minister talks about co-operation and agreement from public servants. We are all in favour of agreement and savings. The Minister has been quoting to me what Fianna Fáil said about the need for savings. Our position has not changed. Can the Minister explain to the public why he wants an agreement with the unions when he is ramming through legislation on Wednesday night giving legal effect to the agreement that is being signed off today? What is the purpose of wanting public service employees to vote for an agreement that will already have been rammed through the Oireachtas?

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

A number of questions were asked. The first is the difference between the Haddington Road agreement and the Croke Park II agreement. I do not know if the Deputy has had a chance to read the Haddington Road agreement but he can see the differences. In the minute I have to respond, I do not propose to go through every section. He can cross-reference the two agreements.

The substantive change is that a number of unions, which did not engage in the first round of discussions, did engage and tabled suggestions. I made it clear the objective for us was to maintain the productivity elements of the deal and to achieve the targeted savings in pay and pensions. I was open to a variety of ways of doing it. More imaginative ways of doing it were tabled and costed. I can go through them in detail, probably next week, on Committee Stage. The two elements dovetail.

With regard to retired public servants, they were not directly represented at pay talks because that is not normally done. Officials from my Department will meet the association this week. It was felt that those who retired with pensions over €32,500, half of the pay cut ceiling, should take some reduction in pay. It is a reduction from 2% for those immediately over €32,500, rising to 5% at the top. We have had long discussions about people who have left the public service with very high pension pots. I am trying to make some reduction in a proportionate way. We will have a chance to tease it out in some detail next week.

The final question was what the point was. I hope we will have an agreement but I cannot assume that we will. A balloting and validation process is required. Some unions will do it through their executives and some will do it by balloting. I cannot presume that so I need a backstop. People will sign up to the agreement and they can sign out of some of the measures in the financial emergency measures in the public interest legislation.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister has published legislation on cutting pay and pensions, increment freezes and increased hours. I have not had a chance to read the legislation in detail. It seems the Minister has a deal. What is amazing is the tactics. The Minister has the legislation and has a majority in the House to push it through. Workers were asked to engage in an exercise of voting for it but the only positive aspect to come out is the more imaginative proposals suggested by unions not involved at the first stage. That is welcome and it shows their tactics were correct in holding the line and not accepting Croke Park II. They were right to wait for Croke Park III. We will wind up with some workers not accepting the deal. What will happen when one of two nurses unions, SIPTU or the INMO, does not accept it? What will happen in the case? How will it pan out in the workplace and how does the Government see it working out? I see a huge amount of division.

As part of this overall package, 30,000 have left the public sector, which is one tenth of the public sector staff. It is also planned to remove 10,000 more by 2015. That will be a total of 40,000. By OECD standards that will be a very small public sector. There are already huge gaps in it. How does the Minister envisage that working?

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

There were a number of questions. As I said, a number of unions engaged in full measure in the Labour Relations Commission after the ballot. That was their choice. I could not force anybody to engage. We could have probably got to the same point had everybody engaged over time, but I was willing to give the space and the time to get the best deal possible. I do not wish to be involved in any of this. Nobody in the Government wishes to be involved in cutting anybody's wages. I wish I was in a position to give increases. However, we must address the deficit. We are borrowing €1 billion per month and in the horizon of the further adjustments we must make, public pay will have to play a proportionate part in that. That is what is on the table now.

On the question of the status of people who vote against it, those unions that engage and accept the Labour Relations Commission proposals will have those proposals implemented. That will be the end of it. Those who reject them will not have the comfort of an agreement and the financial emergency measures in the public interest, FEMPI, legislation will apply to them.

Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for his earlier contribution. He confirmed two things this afternoon. He has signed the deal and published legislation, but he does not have the costing of that with him today. He said he will try to have it on Committee Stage for a detailed discussion. If he has it with him-----

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

The costing of what?

Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The costing of the savings under the agreement. The Minister said he will give it to us next week, but if he has it today he should provide it.

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

I said I will give the detail of the measures next week. The Deputy is asking me to counterpoint the Haddington Road agreement to the other deal.

Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No, my question is very clear. I asked the Minister about the savings that will be achieved this year in public sector pay and he said he will give that next week.

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

I did not. I will clarify that. I am sorry if I misled the Deputy.

Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I want those figures today. Second, the Minister confirmed with regard to the FEMPI legislation that there were no discussions with the pensioners. Third, if the deal is not approved, will the Minister confirm if he will bring forward more legislation or is this the end of it? How much of the savings will be made through the agreement and how much will be made outside the agreement by way of cuts on public sector retirees and the targeted redundancy programme that is not part of this deal?

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

Let me be very clear. I answered the questions and I do not wish to have any confusion about a matter of this importance, nor do I want any excitement to lead to such confusion. I was asked what were the changes between the Croke Park and Haddington Road agreements and I said I would go through that in detail with the Deputy next week. Will we achieve the targets in savings? Yes. There will be €300 million this year and €1 billion by 2015. For that reason it will not be necessary to amend the published Estimates, because those figures are in the Estimates. I hope that is clear.

With regard to the engagement with pensioners, the report last week showed that pensioners are the single group that has been least impacted to date. That is a good thing. However, it is reasonable that people on pensions of more than €32,500, and that is a small number of people, would make a proportionate contribution to the deal, which is 2% at that rate, when one is asking people who are working to take a further cut. At the top end of the scale, I am asking those who are on pensions of over €100,000 to make a 28% contribution. I do not believe there will be a clamour against that on the other side of the House.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister did not answer my question regarding the reduction in the number of workers, which is the other side of what is happening in the public sector. County Laois has a large number of public servants. A total of 40,000 will be gone from the public service by 2015.

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

There is a reduction in the numbers and that was set out in the programme for Government.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is a further 10,000 now.

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

We are doing things differently and providing services differently. We are providing shared services. In human resources management, for example, we are moving from a variety of centres of provision to a single centre of provision in PeoplePoint. We will do the same in payroll. A variety of payroll centres across the public service will be centralised into three. We will modernise the efficiency of the State. We are doing it already. As every business in the country and the world is doing, we will provide services directly and more efficiently to the people. More than 300 services are now provided online. I doubt that the Deputy would think of going to a travel agent instead of buying an Aer Lingus ticket online anymore. People use those facilities and we must provide public services that are attuned to the needs of a modern citizenry and that are affordable and sustainable into the future.