Joe O'Toole (Independent)

Taking up the last point made by Senator Fitzgerald, I want to be careful not to give the predictable response. The Government made a rash, uninformed and overly quick decision on the NUI. It was done without sufficient consultation and in the course of a review of third level education, but I will wait to see what the Minister has to add to it.

In the meantime, there are a number of supposed facts which are incorrect. As I always say, there is a difference between the facts and the truth. The McCarthy report claimed that the dissolution of the NUI would save €5 million. The NUI did the sums on this for me some months back and it says the figure is less than €1 million. I discussed that yesterday with the Minister for Education and Science and he agrees with me and with the NUI that it is only a saving of €1 million but he said that is not his motivation. I put it to him that it was important that the NUI brand, what it has done and the route the graduates have come from should be protected. The Minister appears to be creating some kind of over-arching body to examine the whole area of qualification at third level, etc. What I have asked him to do, which is important, is to protect the NUI brand within that without any constraints on anybody else or on it. In other words, it is a sub-body within a larger body rather than what it currently is, namely, a large body. I asked that that be done. I will come back to that but I believe it is crucial that it be done on a statutory basis.

It is interesting to hear mention of the strike by air traffic controllers. There was a 24-hour strike by air traffic controllers in France yesterday but we did not hear much about it. They had two strikes last year and two the year before. They have them all the time in France, the second largest economy in Europe, but we do not hear much about them because they go on all the time. The last time we had a strike by air traffic controllers was 23 years ago, which coincides perfectly with the period of social partnership. I ask my colleagues and particularly the Leader, whom I know worked very hard in support of some kind of a national agreement, to talk to those blusterers in his own party who, when the public sector agreed to take 12 days' unpaid leave or whatever, described that as paid holidays.

The points made by Senator Fitzgerald are correct. There is a total lack of trust. We should sack the managers who dismissed those workers during the week. They knew what would happen. They knew that laying off those people prior to the case being heard by the Labour Court would create industrial action. They were up for it. They decided to engage in a type of war but they now find themselves in a difficult action, which will get worse. There will be bushfires throughout the public sector as matters go on because there is no longer any trust. A year ago the national implementation authority would have been in contact with the various parties. There would have been phone calls made and pressure put on unions and management to try to find a solution, and solutions would have been found, but that is not happening.

Is what is happening the right approach? Of course it is not; it is a disaster. It is like the point Senator O'Malley made here before Christmas. If reform is such a good thing, why is it not happening? Everybody thinks it is a good idea to have reform of the Seanad and it is not happening. It is because other changes have not come into place. More problems will arise with the public sector and the idea that the Government can legislate its way out of it is nonsense because all that will do is lead to all-out strikes, with larger groups involved, which will worsen rather than improve the problem.