Thomas Byrne (Meath East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Approximately 11,000 teachers have qualified since 2011 and are on pay scales lower than those of their colleagues who qualified prior to that year. Over the next 12 months, demographic pressures mean that another 5,000 teachers will enter this cohort. If the Government led by the Fine Gael Party sticks to its commitment under the confidence-and-supply agreement to reduce the pupil-teacher ratio, that number will rise even higher. The public service pay stability agreement recently agreed by the Irish Congress of Trade Unions provides that an examination of the salary scale issues for new entrants to the public sector will take place within one year of the adoption of the agreement. As the House knows, the agreement has been roundly rejected by the INTO and the TUI and will be the subject of a ballot by members of the ASTI in the coming weeks.

The context here is a massive flight of young teachers to Dubai and other countries that are also recruiting Irish teachers. This is taking place against a background where we require teachers, particularly at second level but also at primary level, to be more qualified than ever before, with the attendant expense that goes with that. What is the timescale for the examination, under the public service stability agreement, of the salary scales of new entrants to the public sector in general and to teaching in particular, where a huge number of workers are affected?

When will the talks commence on this matter? What plans does the Government have to start this process? What plans does it have to show newly qualified teachers - they are becoming older as the years go by - a pathway so that they can get full pay scale equality with their more senior counterparts?

That is what we are looking for here. There has been a bit of devilment at times on the Government side with claims that somebody with more years’ experience gets more pay. This is not about pay but about pay scales. These teachers are on lower pay scales. It is having a hugely detrimental effect on morale in our schools and is massively contributing to the teacher shortage, an issue about which I have already suggested the Minister is not doing enough. I want answers from the Minister in the clearest possible terms which he and the Government have not yet given.

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Thomas Byrne for raising this issue. I can fully understand the pursuit by the teachers’ unions of this particular issue. I sat down with the teachers’ unions through the teacher conciliation service and we negotiated, under the Lansdowne Road agreement, substantial increase for newly qualified teachers. It represented increases of 15% and 22% under that agreement, closing 75% of the gap in the scale. Indeed, at the higher points in the scales, the two scales have been merged.

From January next year, a newly qualified teacher straight out of college will be recruited at €35,600 a year. That is competitive for a newly qualified graduate. The issue of new entrants that the Deputy raised arises not just for education, although the largest numbers of recruits in those difficult years were in education. It raises issues right across the entire public service. In terms of dealing with this issue, it was on the table at the public pay talks but an agreement was negotiated, which did not include a settlement of that issue. The €900 million assigned in those pay talks were assigned on a more general basis.

However, it was agreed in the pay negotiations that the issues of new entrant pay and those areas in the public service with difficulty in recruiting will be discussed through process in the agreement. Money has not been set aside in the agreement at this point for either of these issues, nor has a deadline been set for the conclusion of such discussions. However, this remains an issue of concern for the trade unions and the Government side. A forum where the issues can be discussed in greater detail has been set out. This is an indication of openness on the part of the Government to consider these issues.

We have to make decisions in the context of scarce resources, however. The Deputy knows that in education we have been able to employ over 5,000 additional teachers between last September and this September, along with 2,000 special needs assistants, SNAs. Those investments need to be accommodated. One is always weighing on the one side, the legitimate expectation of public service employees for more pay against the need to invest in services, particularly after a decade when it was extremely difficult to do so. We have to balance those two levels of expectation from the public. The public service pay agreement provides a framework within which we can do that. It has been agreed by the Irish Congress of Trade Unions.

Thomas Byrne (Meath East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As well as being rejected by the teachers’ unions individually.

The Minister failed to outline when this process will start. He said there were no deadlines as to its conclusion but he did not say when it will start. In a public press statement, the INTO is under the impression this will start soon. The agreement provides it will start in 12 months. Will the Minister say here when this process to discuss this issue will start? Teachers are entitled to know. They are working under sometimes difficult conditions and low morale.

Is the Minister at least prepared to concede that the Government supports the principle of equal pay scales for people, in this case teachers, who do the same job? Does he agree with his colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Mitchell O'Connor, or does he agree with his anonymous colleagues who said that her intervention was deeply unhelpful? The Minister must take a side. Whose side is he on? Is he on the side of what is just, fair and provided for in the agreement and is he prepared to set out when the process in that agreement will start?

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The agreement is a cross-Government agreement involving the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform and the Irish Congress of Trade Unions. It provides that consideration of the issue of newly-qualified pay will occur within 12 months of the commencement of the agreement, so there is a deadline. Obviously, there will be discussions if some unions wish to move that, but an outer limit of 12 months has been set. That is clear.

As I indicated in my initial response, equality of treatment must be considered across the spectrum. We have a responsibility for children with special needs, for young people who are seeking access to apprenticeships and for investment needs across the education system. Every year we must provide for 15,000 additional school places - build and equip them and provide teachers and support in them. Our treatment of everyone in the public service must be fair and equal. They have expectations of us. We met the teachers' unions and negotiated an agreement which met three quarters of what was sought. It provides for an entry pay level for a newly-qualified teacher of €35,600 from next January. That is treating everybody who has a legitimate expectation of my Department in a fair and equal manner. Indeed, similar expectations occur in housing and health and they are the subject of debates in this House all the time. We must balance those issues and the Lansdowne Road agreement and its successor provide for that. It is a framework within which we can make the balances and choices that we believe are fair and equal to all who have legitimate expectations of us.

Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are 446 people on trolleys in our hospitals today. In my city of Cork, there are 43 people on trolleys in wards and in the accident and emergency departments of Mercy University Hospital and Cork University Hospital, CUH. Tuigeann an tAire gur inniu an 28 Mean Fómhair. The weather is still fine and it should be a time of relatively low pressure on the system, yet we are looking at numbers on trolleys equivalent to over 40% of the record numbers. I am sure I am not alone in having grave concern and trepidation as to what will transpire this winter as pressure intensifies.

There were record numbers on waiting lists this summer, at well in excess of 600,000. The most recent figures for August show an increase of 3,500 on public outpatient waiting lists. For example, the number of people waiting for gynaecology appointments in the maternity hospital in Cork for over 18 months has jumped by more than 500% in the last year, numbering over 1,000 women. The lack of full cover for 20 to 22 week scans means cases are missed, with very serious potential implications for women. The facts are plain. Since the Government took office and the Minister for Health, Deputy Harris, undertook his role the number of outpatients waiting for a hospital appointment has grown continuously. All Fine Gael and this Government have achieved in health is to allow the crisis to escalate to a point that it has become almost normalised.

Many people in hospital could return home much earlier if they were confident they would receive the supports and assistance they need. However, they have not been available for some time. Home help and home care packages were decimated during the crash and the current Government has entirely neglected this area. The under-resourcing of home help has meant that not only are people fearful of returning home but it has also affected people's confidence and reduced their quality of life. Workers are hassled, harried and under pressure, through no fault of their own, trying to manage 15-minute slot after 15-minute slot when the slot really requires half an hour. The vast majority of older people prefer to live their lives in their own homes if possible, a desire shared by their families. We spend €490 million on the fair deal scheme. In comparison, we spend €251 million on home help hours and €149 million on home care packages. There must be a shift in policy and a new focus on what older people want.

Yesterday, Sinn Féin launched a document outlining how we would invest an additional €72.65 million in this area, including in respect of 2.1 million home help hours and 2,500 home care packages.

This investment would significantly enhance the quality of life of older people, the ill and disabled persons and reduce the burden on hospitals which are positively creaking under the pressure. Will the Government commit to ensuring the scandalous under-resourcing of care at home is addressed comprehensibly in the forthcoming budget or will it prioritise tax cuts for higher earners above the needs of an elderly woman who needs assistance to get out of bed to begin her day at home?

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As the Deputy is well aware, the announcement on budgetary matters will be made in due course, namely, on 10 October, and no decisions will be indicated until that point.

As a result of the re-investment the Government has made in the health service, the number of patients being treated across the system increased by 250,000 per annum in the past four years. This means almost 7,000 patients are treated in hospital every day and most return home with their life prospects considerably improved as a result of their treatment. We are, therefore, delivering a quality health service.

As the Deputy knows, problems at certain access points have been in the system for many years. It is encouraging, however, that trolley waiting, the very issue the Deputy raises, has reduced considerably across a range of hospitals, including Beaumont, St. Vincent's, James Connolly and Mayo university hospitals. The reductions in trolley waiting in these hospitals range from 40% to 68%. These significant improvements show that the Government's focus on trolley waiting is having an impact. This year, numbers waiting on trolleys across the board are lower than they were last year. The exemplars of good practice show that the policy of focusing on trolley waiting is working. We must continue to roll out this policy and there must be a clear focus on ensuring vulnerable people who enter hospitals through accident and emergency departments are given priority in the hospital service. As I stated, this is happening in many hospitals.

In terms of provision for people to live in at home, we are assessing the need for a more comprehensive home care support package. The Minister of State, Deputy Jim Daly, is examining this issue and consultations are under way to determine how best this can be achieved. The Minister for Health has made increased provision for home help and home care packages. According to a report in yesterday's newspapers, he reported a 10% increase in activity in these areas. Investment is being made all the time to try to make the experience of our hospitals better for every patient.

It is worth paying tribute to those who work in the health service and successfully treat 7,000 people every day, either as inpatients or day cases. This is having an impact on quality of life. While we have problems at discharge and admission, these must be resolved over time.

The Minister will obviously make investment plans for the future. We have the first investments in a new maternity hospital, a new children's hospital and a new hospital providing forensic psychiatric care. These are real investments that will improve quality of life.

Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is difficult to credit the statement of improvements in individual hospitals. In reality, there are 446 people on trolleys and even ten years ago, this would have been unacceptable at a time of year when pressure on hospitals should be low. We have reached record numbers of trolleys in winter and extremely high levels in summer and this is putting our system under incredible pressure.

I will certainly pay tribute to those who work extremely hard in the health system and are under severe pressure, in particular, home helps who have to rush across cities and counties to try to do half an hour's work in ten or 15 minutes, which is utterly unacceptable.

The position on the ground is that in April last, 350 people who had been allocated home help in South Lee had not received it specifically due to financial constraints on the Health Service Executive.

It was not down to any delay in processing. This was not helped by the fact that the home help co-ordinator is doing three days per week in the area. Many people have left the system because they have not been able to get the hours. While a consultation may be happening on a statutory scheme or whatever it may be, there is no excuse for this underinvestment in home care. It is a reflection on the Government's wrong priorities and the more expensive cost of home care provided through for-profit agencies compared with direct hires through the HSE.

Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I must call the Minister.

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy has to reflect on what the Government has provided in the past two years. In that time, an additional €1.3 billion has been invested in the health service. It has been the greatest recipient of any resource at a time when we are now able to reinvest. Priority has been given to health by the Government. The Deputy must also recognise that we had a lost decade. I will not go into the origins of that, but investments that everyone would have liked to have made were not possible. Now, however, we are returning to a position in which we can make prudent investments. The national children's hospital, the national maternity hospital and the national forensic psychiatric hospital are in the building pipeline and will provide increases.

We are ensuring that the extra €1.3 billion is spread judiciously across all demands. Everyone recognises that there are demands, but the Deputy must also recognise that there have been genuine service improvements. Consider hospitals such as Beaumont, St. Vincent's, Cavan, Connolly, Mayo and others, which are delivering improvements. They are exemplars. The Minister is determined to ensure that good practice in those hospitals is mirrored in others where there are continuing difficulties.

Michael Harty (Clare, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I wish to raise the issue of direct provision, specifically in the context of the recent issuing of letters to single male asylum seekers who are on deportation orders telling them that they must vacate their direct provision centres within four weeks. Many are from countries, such as, for example, Somalia and Palestine, to which Ireland cannot deport people. Will this new policy extend to families and children on deportation orders?

The direct provision system was established 17 years ago and was only meant to be an interim solution in respect of the high number of asylum seekers entering Ireland seeking the protection of the State. It was intended to provide asylum seekers with temporary accommodation while their applications were being processed. Now, more than 4,000 asylum seekers, of whom 1,600 are children, are in direct provision.

The issuing of these letters by the Reception and Integration Agency, RIA, of the Department of Justice and Equality has been condemned by the Irish Immigrant Support Centre, Nasc, which claims that this is actively seeking to make asylum seekers homeless and destitute. These deportees have no entitlement to social welfare and will be unable to access homeless services. Thus, they will have no money, homes, residency or right to work. Invariably, they will become homeless and add to the crisis of street homelessness.

The McMahon report of 2015 brought about some improvements, but more than 25% of asylum seekers are still waiting for longer than three years to have their applications for asylum processed. There is no statutory time limit on processing applications. This leads to a loss of autonomy and self-worth. As the Supreme Court ruled this year, not being able to work in these circumstances goes against the constitutional.

The State has a duty of care to these asylum seekers to look after them in a more humane way until they are granted asylum, subsidiary protection or leave to remain or exit Ireland voluntarily or are deported. They should not be turned out onto the streets without support. Why has this shift in policy occurred? The Minister of State, Deputy Stanton, has stated that no asylum seeker will be made homeless as a result of these letters. What does that mean? Are these letters to be ignored? Has the RIA changed its mind and withdrawn them? What exactly is going on? I would be grateful for the Minister's reply.

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy for raising this issue. As he outlined, we are providing temporary accommodation - bed, breakfast and board - for almost 5,000 individuals.

Every year, approximately 2,000 new applicants come and we try to provide a service for them. The idea behind this accommodation is to provide for people who would otherwise arrive in a very vulnerable condition. There is a limited number of such places, with very high occupancy rates, that must accommodate the 50 people a week who need accommodation and who have a call on this. We must ensure we can, to the best of our ability, be fair and equal to all those who are making a case to the State. There has been significant effort to improve the conditions. The McMahon report made 173 recommendations of which 133 have been fully implemented and a further 36 are in progress. That has brought tangible improvement in the conditions of people who are awaiting a decision. It includes standards, availability of self-catering and so on.

In terms of the ban on employment, the court has yet to make an order. On foot of that order, the Government will have to consider its implications. A provisional ruling has been made but the final order is yet to be made. We have made huge efforts to simplify the process through legislation in order that people are not in temporary accommodation for long periods. It was never intended that it should be for long periods. To facilitate people coming through, there must be some effort in respect of people who have been the subject of deportation orders to see that they would move on since their cases have been fully adjudicated under the international rules we apply and a decision made that they are not eligible for status in Ireland. That is the position. We will try to deal with each person in the most humane way we can. We cannot guarantee that everyone is able to remain forever in accommodation if he or she has been unsuccessful in his or her application. This is an effort to deal with a problem in a reasonable and fair way as best we can.

Michael Harty (Clare, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Direct provision needs to be reviewed in its entirety because it has become an institutional form of living. Many asylum seekers have been waiting more than five years to have their asylum application processed. That leads them to live in accommodation that is entirely unsuitable for them for prolonged periods. They are banned from taking up work, live in a state of idleness and are confined to reception centres. They do not have an opportunity to cook; they are eating in canteens at set hours and it has become an institutional form of life. The right to employment is still denied to them but hopefully it will be rectified in the coming weeks. Children living in direct provision suffer greatly just as children living in homeless situations do. They live in fear for their personal safety even in the centres. There are 35 centres around the country, which are mobile homes, converted hotels or such like. The accommodation is cramped and overcrowded. It costs €50 million to fund direct provision. The money could be spent in a much different way.

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have 2,000 people per annum presenting with a submission for asylum. These centres are an offer by the State to provide full bed and board, access to utilities, welfare payments and medical facilities. People are not obliged to accept offers and many do not take them up. They represent the State attempting to provide for such people, instead of the 2,000 who come in going onto the streets and being vulnerable as they would be. The State is providing an option for them to be accommodated in this way. It is not an ideal situation. The McMahon report, which investigated this, has been done and action has been taken to implement the recommendations it made.

With regard to the issue of dealing with cases more quickly, the new legislation will accelerate it and we hope there will no longer be the long delays the Deputy rightly says have been a feature of this provision in the past.

The Minister of State, Deputy Stanton, who is a particularly compassionate and vigilant Minister, has visited these centres. He is very keen to try to deal with this as effectively as possible. He is dealing with a difficult situation in a way that is as fair as we can be. When a decision is made to reject a case there has to be an end to the process.

Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Caithfimid cloí leis an gclog.

Catherine Martin (Dublin Rathdown, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Ireland's pension gap has widened in the lifetime of this Government and the previous one. Women work outside home in fewer numbers with most getting paid less when they do. When it comes to retirement, women now typically have 37% less to live on than men. On 21 September the Taoiseach announced plans for a new pension strategy to be completed by the end of the year, including a five-year roadmap for pension reform. As Minister for Social Protection, he also committed to conduct an overall pension review that was to be completed by the middle of this year. It is now almost October and it is not known if that pension review has been completed, let alone published.

Many women who got up early in the morning for years to work or look after the nation's children are now entering an insecure impoverished retirement. They will have limited access to pensions because of low pay, poor conditions of work and having to take time out for caring responsibilities. Women who worked on family farms and in family businesses also do not have social insurance coverage meaning they are totally reliant on their husbands in older age. What steps will the Government take to analyse the differential impacts of pension policy for men and women? Will it redress these glaring, flagrant inequalities among pensioners currently in receipt of benefits?

Lack of access to the homemaker's scheme has led to experiences of severe inequality for an entire generation of women in the State pension system. The homemaker's scheme only allows for the backdating of pension contributions to 1994. What about all the women before 1994? Let us not forget the State-enforced marriage bar, which up to 1973 meant women had no choice but to give up their public service and Civil Service jobs when they got married. Tens of thousands of women are out in the cold and are forgotten. They do not receive equal treatment because of a sudden unfair cut-off point of 6 April 1994. This is simply not good enough; they deserve better. The Taoiseach has said he plans to reward work and enterprise in the budget and yet he has claimed that pensions for these women, forcibly barred from work by the State, would be too expensive. Indeed they should paid reparations and not a mere State pension. It is never too late to do the right thing.

Will the Government commit to backdating the homemaker's scheme to 1973, rather than this discriminatory cut-off point of 1994? When will the Government publish the review on the differentiated impacts of pension policy? Will this be published before any new strategy is conducted or will the Government continue its penchant for revolving-door Ministries that never seem to finish any jobs they start?

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy raises a very important issue. There is widespread under-provision in pensions and, as she rightly said, the under-provision is much more acute among women workers than among male workers. While I do not have the figures to hand today, from memory less than half of workers had access to any pension support other than the State contributory scheme. This has been a feature of our provision over many years.

Deputy Burton is in the Chamber. I know the previous Government took action to ensure that every employer would have to provide the option of a scheme to every worker. Therefore there is an obligation on employers to provide such a scheme. The State, of course, supports though tax breaks people participating in such a scheme. The wider issues of whether there should be compulsory contribution into a scheme or whether it should be automatic enrolment with an obligation to drop out are very significant and need to be assessed in detail. Obviously much work is required initially assessing the potential impact of them and considerable consultation on them would be required.

I do not have access to when the work will be completed, but it is a very important issue which poses problems for long-term funding for all of us as we live longer and remain reliant on the State for much longer.

The State pension, which was introduced in 1953, was based on contributions by people who were at work. That has been the model and access is done by way of averaging over one's entire life. That has favoured people who, for example, entered late and were just in the scheme for a short period and get a full pension while others, as Deputy Catherine Martin described, who drop out for periods can have their rights diluted. One of the issues that has been examined by the Department is whether one should move to a total contribution approach rather than using the averaging rule. The difficulty with such a change is that there could be losers as well as winners in such a scheme.

I understand the Department has indicated in the course of replies to parliamentary questions that the law would have to change retrospectively for homemakers and that would have a significant cost. From recollection, more than €250 million would be involved. Again, it would have to be assessed in the context of other budgetary options that fall to be considered by the State. This is a complex area and having a full pension review that evaluates all of those issues, and tries to decide where the allocation of responsibility falls between employers, individuals and the State, requires careful work. I look forward to that review which has not come to Government at this point.

Catherine Martin (Dublin Rathdown, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister but, with respect, it is hard for those women who have been denied their pension entitlements to take all that he has said at face value given that actions taken by this and the previous Government, rather than addressing the inequalities in the pension-pay gap, have only allowed them to deepen. In 2012, the previous Government introduced changes to the eligibility criteria for the contributory State pension. That had the effect of increasing the number of PRSI contributions required for the higher payments and women are most likely to lose out because of periods out of the workforce due to family responsibilities or having held part-time employment.

Of the 36,000 people the Department of Social Protection records as being affected by the changes from June 2016, more than 62% were women. Will the Government reverse the 2012 changes to pension contributions? As budget 2018 approaches, I remind the Minister that women benefit less from cuts to income tax as they are more likely to find themselves in part-time and low-paid jobs and take time out from work for unpaid care responsibilities. The priority in the upcoming budget should lie in investment in public services and any tax cuts need to be in the form of progressive taxation that will benefit women and men equally.

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

One has to bear in mind what was done in 2012. The system that prevailed before that meant that someone who perhaps had made 1,000 contributions over his or her entire life could get a 98% pension and someone who had made double those contributions over his or her life would get the same pension. There was an effort to relate more fairly the amount of pension provided to the contribution record of the individual. It is a contributory scheme. To move away from that principle of relating to a reasonable degree the eligibility to the contributions would be a strange direction for policy to take. We must try to build a system where people make contributions and employers also make contributions and we build up both the State element and the private element to give adequate pension cover. That is the challenge we have. I do not think we can assume that those who made a lesser contribution can automatically get the same amount as those who made a greater contribution. That is the dilemma we face.

Deputy Catherine Martin is correct that we need to look in particular at the position of women in the workforce. That is an issue that will have to be addressed in the wider policy but it is part of a bigger picture which will dominate discussion over many years.