Alex White (Labour)

Then it should really state that. If we look at the rest of the Act, section 2(2) seems to suggest that a person is either covered under one or the other. Section 2(2) states:

(2) Where the remuneration of a public servant is fixed by a relevant provision, then, subject to subsections (3) and (4), the relevant provision shall be taken to have been amended so that the remuneration is—

(a) in the case of persons to whom Table 1 to this section relates, reduced in accordance with that Table, and

(b) in any other case, subject to subsection (7), reduced in accordance with Table 2 or Table 3 (as the case requires) to this section.

We are either in one case or the other. The drafting has allowed for things to fall between the cracks. If a pay cut is being dealt with under table 1, then it will not be dealt with under the other provisions. There is a problem in the way things are drafted, and we could have avoided all doubt by putting in the word "all" before "remuneration". We need some way to make it clear that the percentage reduction will capture both the ministerial salary and the Deputy's salary, which is clearly what is intended by the Government. Otherwise, the relevant reduction of the Taoiseach's salary would apply only to that part of his earnings which is attributable to his earnings as Taoiseach and not in respect of his earnings as a Deputy. That is clearly an anomaly in the Bill.

The Minister of State claimed that what is intended is to take 10% of his salary as a Minister of State, 8% of his salary as a Deputy and to make up for that by taking an additional 2%.