Seanad debates

Thursday, 17 December 2009

Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest (No. 2) Bill 2009: Second Stage

 

4:00 pm

Photo of Paul BradfordPaul Bradford (Fine Gael)

I hope the so-called green shoots will emerge and while the economic hope about which we read on a weekly basis must be welcomed, we still have to be concerned that we are on the precipice and cannot continue, as a people, to borrow €500 million a week. I agree with Senator Harris that the public fully understands the scale of the problem and, once again, we, the politicians, are playing catch-up. The public did not welcome the imposition of income and pension levies last year and people did not cheer about the fact that public sector pay was scheduled to be reduced, but they fully understand why this is happening.

I could spend the next five years giving a history lesson about the wrong decisions taken in the past ten or 12 years and how the Government's fiscal and budgetary policies have landed us in this mess, but that would not solve tomorrow's problems. The public will pass its own political judgment come the next general election. In the meantime, as I stated last week to the Minister of State when we were making pre-budget statements, the budget and the Bill are not about redeeming any political party; they should be about redeeming the economy and a future for our young people. I hope they will help in that regard.

The Minister of State is aware of Fine Gael's view on the Bill, in particular the proposed pay cuts. We acknowledge that at least €4 billion of adjustments were required as of last week and will still be required next week. However, we would have been much happier if those public and civil servants with incomes under €30,000 were unaffected. It would have been a much more moral basis for this penal legislation to allow those with incomes under €30,000 to have their income remain as is. That is what disappoints me strongly about the Bill.

My colleagues have spoken about public sector reform. As any fair person would, I welcome the fact that over the course of the past month it seemed the trade union leadership proactively engaged with the Government on the issue. The problems in the public sector which the unions recognised needed to be reformed during their intensive engagement with the Government two or three weeks ago remain and need to be reformed. I am very disappointed at the pronouncements from some of the senior officials who, because of the breakdown of the negotiations with the Government, are unwilling to engage in reform.

We have not just a political duty but a moral duty as elected Members of this and the other House to strongly ask of trade union leaders and demand of the Government that reform is put back on the agenda at the negotiating table. The public service is about serving the public. It is about the taxpayer and how his or her money is spent. We have a duty to ensure it is spent well. That was one of the great difficulties with benchmarking, an issue Fine Gael highlighted consistently in recent years, whereby the taxpayer was not getting value for money.

The question of public sector reform must be put back on the agenda. It cannot simply be a menu from which unions and Governments pick and choose. If public sector reform was necessary, appropriate and doable a fortnight ago, surely the same equation is in place today. The trade unions have a national and moral obligation to come back to negotiate the issue of public sector reform with the Minister of State and his colleagues. There is a demand among the public for this to be done. There is also a genuine appetite for it among the vast majority of public servants who work in every town, townland and village. On a daily basis, they can see the problems which could be solved through reform of their offices, how they do their jobs and are promoted. It must be a key to turning around the economy.

I agree with my colleagues who state we must address the issue of the semi-State bodies. It is not politically popular to suggest more people have to take a pay cut, but I have read the list of unaffected public bodies in the Schedule, ranging from the Dublin Airport Authority to the National Treasury Management Agency, Bord Gais, Bord na gCon, the Cork Airport Authority and the ESB, and we know, in our heart of hearts, that they will have to be re-examined. The wages of those who work in these agencies, the vast majority of whom do outstanding work and work very hard, are paid by the taxpayer and while we borrow €500 million a week to pay off these bills, matters cannot continue as heretofore. The issue has to be examined.

The concept of wildcat strikes throughout the utilities, in particular the threatened shut-down of our electricity sector, is entirely unacceptable in this democracy. One month or six weeks ago I expressed my concern on reading that the British trade union leader, Arthur Scargill, was on some type of tour of the country. Some of the unions were trying to describe it as an anniversary victory tour. It was utter delusion on the part of a man who had ruined an industry in Britain, split a nation and almost abolished his own union. It is very worrying and frightening that a man who almost brought a country to its knees should be seen as a hero. We need positive leadership from our trade unions and I look forward to it engaging with the Government and the political parties. This and the other House are where real debate about where the country is going, social partnership, wage rates and public service reform must stem. We need to engage in this regard.

We will debate on Committee Stage sections 6 and 9 and the exemptions and disputes which will arise. It is difficult to clarify whether a particular small group of companies is part of the private or public service. I have correspondence from a small company in this regard which I will pass to the Minister of State's officials for their consideration and we can return to the matter on Committee Stage. These companies did not benefit from benchmarking, as they were told they were private and, therefore, not eligible, but they were affected by the income levies.

I wish the Minister of State well with the Bill. It is very important for the future of the country that we get out financial house in order. I have a difficulty with how some of the cuts are being imposed but living in the real world I know that what is being done has to be done.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.