Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

6. To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting with Ms Christine Lagarde. [28850/18]

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

7. To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting with IMF managing director, Ms Christine Lagarde. [29004/18]

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 6 and 7 together.

I had a very positive meeting with Ms Christine Lagarde, IMF managing director, in Government Buildings on 25 June. I also hosted a dinner to mark her visit to Ireland on the evening of 26 June. Our exchanges covered the economic outlook, international trade and gender equality issues.

On the economic outlook, we discussed the latest IMF article IV assessment of the Irish economy. We agreed that the economy was enjoying a period of strong growth and increasing employment but that we must proceed carefully to ensure the benefits were shared throughout the country, while guarding against the type of policies that had resulted in the boom and bust pattern of the past.

On trade, we discussed the risks posed by growing international tensions. I welcomed Ms Lagarde's strong and vocal advocacy for preserving and deepening the rules-based multilateral trading system, which is, of course, crucially important to our own highly open economy. We agreed that in a trade war there would be no winners.

Ms Lagarde also informed me about the work she was doing to advance gender equality, including placing it at the centre of the IMF's work. I offered her my strong support in that regard. I also took the opportunity to highlight some recent Government initiatives in this area, including the recently published Gender Pay Gap (Wage Transparency) Bill and the Better Balance for Better Business initiative which I subsequently launched on 30 July and which aims to increase women's representation on company boards and in senior management roles.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is the tenth anniversary of the collapse of Lehman Brothers and our own financial and construction sector collapse which caused so much suffering and unemployment, the loss of trade and the collapse of many businesses for families and individuals across Ireland. The Taoiseach referred to threats to the international economy and the risk of a trade war, obviously something he does not want, but the two greatest threats to the economy are the inability of the Government, despite its good intentions, which I acknowledge, to get to grips with the housing issue and its inability to get to grips with the health issue. The Government is hapless in dealing with both, notwithstanding its genius for spin. Did the Taoiseach consider asking the IMF to provide the Government with advice on how to get to grips with the housing and health issues? We received some advice from the IMF in the past, some of which was very difficult, while some, in particular in addressing unemployment and getting people back to work, was quite helpful.

The Taoiseach referred to the gender pay gap. Why is the Government restricting the companies which will be subject to the gender pay gap legislation to those with 250 employees or more? Why can we not start with companies with 50 employees or more, as has happened in our neighbouring country, the United Kingdom? There is no rational basis to so heavily restricting our approach to companies having to publish information on why women are so significantly underpaid.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Taoiseach will be aware that Ms Christine Lagarde again warned about the impact of Brexit on both Britain and the European Union as a whole. There have been substantial changes in various forecasts on the impact of various scenarios, ranging from a car crash next March to the now clearly dead option of EEA membership for the United Kingdom. When Copenhagen Economics studied the different scenarios, it estimated that national income would be hit by approximately 4.3% in both the customs union and free trade agreement scenarios. In both scenarios under discussion, therefore, Ireland will be hit worse than any other European Union member state. Will the Taoiseach confirm that this analysis continues to form the basis of and inform Government policy? The study also points to the impact of the costs that will ensue from the United Kingdom not being in the Single Market, irrespective of customs and trade policy. This is because compliance rules will place very significant and unavoidable burdens on many companies. Does the Taoiseach accept that this is another reason detaching Single Market access from the backstop is unacceptable?

On trade wars, has the Government written formally to President Trump or otherwise communicated its opposition to and alarm at the increasingly protectionist approach he is taking to trade and the degree to which his actions and policies could cause a very destabilising era of trade protectionism?

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

I return to the issues of the gender pay gap and gender equality more generally. I understand these matters formed part of the Taoiseach's discussions in June with Ms Christine Lagarde. The gender pay gap is a frontline equality issue, not a sideline, petty concern. It is a matter of deep concern that, notwithstanding legislation on equal pay for work of equal value dating back to the 1970s, we continue to witness gross disparity in the earnings of men and women, respectively. I share Deputy Joan Burton's concern about the very high threshold for the implementation of the legislation and reporting requirements, which is companies with 250 employees or more. I do not accept that a lower threshold would create an undue administrative burden, which is, I suspect, the response the Taoiseach is lining up. The suggested penalties for companies which fail to make information public must be pointed and of sufficient weight to act as an incentive to good practice and a disincentive to continuing with bad practices. When does the Taoiseach intend to introduce the Bill in the Dáil and when will a debate take place on it? I ask him to confirm his political commitment to the speedy passage of the legislation which is just one of the measures needed to achieve full equality for women in society.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The answer to Deputy Joan Burton's question is that we did not specifically ask the IMF to advise us on health reform or housing. I will consider it as it is always useful to have an external view from an international body on how one is doing.

Generally, we use the OECD for that, but we could potentially ask the IMF to do it. I am a little taken aback that a centre-left politician would ask us to bring in the IMF to advise us on health and housing. Given the IMF's view as to how to reform public services in other jurisdictions, I am not sure the answer we would get from the IMF would be supported by parties of the left, but it is never a harm to ask. It certainly gave us some good advice in the past during the bailout-----

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It has changed its tune and has suggested we invest in people. Parties of the left agree with that, but clearly Fine Gael does not.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----and other advice that we did not follow. For example, the IMF took the view that we would help to resolve our unemployment crisis by cutting the minimum wage. That was done by Fianna Fáil and the Greens in office and we decided to reverse that when Fine Gael and the Labour Party came into office. Fine Gael has increased the minimum wage three times since, with a further increase in January.

As for international analyses as to how Ireland is doing, I note that the United Nations Development Programme, UNDP, released its figures last week as to how Ireland is performing across a number of measures. The UNDP uses something called the human development index, which, unlike gross domestic product, GDP, which just measures economic success, power and prowess, looks at things such as life expectancy and education and many other different factors. The UNDP put Ireland in fourth place in the world and said Ireland had moved up the rankings between 2012 and 2017, more quickly than any other country in the world. While we have serious problems and enormous challenges in this country, which no one denies for a second, at least one body, the United Nations, recognises the enormous progress we have made. I imagine that if a UN committee of less stature had a critical report about Ireland, it probably would have been major news, but when a big agency such as the UN Development Programme produces a report such as the one it has produced, it barely gets noticed. Perhaps this is an opportunity at least to put that on the record of the Dáil.

The Government approved the general scheme of the gender pay gap Bill. I acknowledge Senator Bacik in particular as being one of the leaders behind this who gave impetus to the Bill. It will promote transparency on wage levels, initially for large employers. The general scheme proposes that we start with employers of more than 250 employees and extend over time to smaller employers of about 50. Like many things, and as is often the case with a new policy or measure, this would be done with a view to phasing it in. Phasing in measures allows us to pick up mistakes and so on. We do not want to wait until we have everything ready and all the staff and IT systems in place to do this. We can bring it in in phases. We often phase in policies, which I do not think is necessarily a bad thing. The legislation will come before the Dáil and the Seanad, which may decide that 250 is too high and 50 too low and decide on a different figure, and we are certainly open to considering that.

Regarding trade wars, "Yes, absolutely" is the answer to Deputy Martin's question. When I met President Trump last March, it was one of the issues we discussed. I explained to him why we believe trade wars have no winners and why we believe in free trade across the Atlantic. I always use the opportunity when I engage with the US Administration to point out the extent to which trade in Ireland now very much goes both ways. The US has a small trade surplus with Ireland. We have a surplus in terms of goods, and they have a surplus in terms of services. President Trump often sees trade only as goods. He very much fixates on cars, steel and other manufactured items, whereas we all know that the economy is much more than goods. Services are now the biggest part of any western economy, and the US has a very significant surplus with Ireland when it comes to services. Investment goes both ways. Approximately 150,000 people in Ireland work in US-owned firms. Approximately 100,000 Americans across 50 states work in Irish-owned firms.

I always try to make this point, that free trade makes everyone better off in the round. I keep making that case. I also made the case with Kevin Hassett, who visited last week. Last week I had the opportunity to meet him in the US ambassador's residence. The Ministers of State, Deputies Breen and O'Donovan, very recently paid a visit to the United States to discuss Aughinish Alumina and Rusal and our concern that US trade sanctions may affect Rusal. We are working very hard on that, and Deputy Deasy is very involved in it too. The answer, therefore, is "Yes". It is always our role in engagements with the US Administration to make the case for free trade, which, along with free enterprise, once was a core American value but is less so under the current Administration.

Regarding the better balance for business initiative, we have established a business-led group charged with increasing the representation of women on boards of Irish publicly listed companies. The group is led by Bríd Horan, former deputy CEO of the ESB, and Gary Kennedy, who is chair of Greencore, and it is based on the successful model in the UK. It will engage with companies and report back on actions to increase the percentage of women on corporate boards and in senior management in leading companies. Deputies will be aware that we have met and exceeded our target of ensuring that at least 40% of State board members are women - we met the target in July - and that in the past year, 52% of appointments to State boards through the Public Appointments Service, PAS, process were female. This is the first time that more than half of the people appointed to State boards through the PAS process have been female. We are not going to wait at 40%. We are going to keep moving towards parity. Furthermore, about 40% of appointments last year to the senior positions of the public service, those of Secretary General and assistant secretary, were female.