PEOPLE ARE tired of hearing bad economic news. They want reassurance that the days of comfortable living will return. They wish to believe their children will get jobs when they leave school. They hope for an easy retirement. That is understandable. But unless we all pull together in tackling a loss of competitiveness, rising unemployment and soaring Government debt, those aspirations could be delayed for years.
The road ahead is hard. People in positions of leadership will be criticised if they take correct, unpopular decisions. If the right choices are made, however, the most vulnerable can be protected; jobs can be saved and the recession shortened. A retreat into confrontation and industrial strife would be a recipe for disaster. Eminent civil servant and economist T K Whitaker has spoken of a social obligation to explore every alternative to a loss of employment. And he concluded that “shorter working hours and pay cuts are preferable to a loss of jobs in present circumstances”.
Ictu general secretary David Begg finds himself in an invidious position. While recognising a necessity for social partnership, unrest has been growing among affiliated trade unions. There is no certainty the economic stimulus package on offer from the Government is sufficient to buy industrial peace. Because of that, Ictu has sought further clarifications concerning the scale and scope of the measures proposed. Just how those discussions will go is unclear. But Mr Begg has signalled a willingness to co-operate by describing the talks as “the only show in town”.
A broad measure of agreement exists between Ictu and employers’ group Ibec on the need to protect jobs through the introduction of a billion-euro subsidy scheme. The Government has been reluctant to offer that kind of money and has sought to limit its coverage to manufacturing and internationally traded services. The Minister for Finance cautioned yesterday against the risk of displacing existing jobs by subsidising others. It is a complex situation, further complicated by the threat of social instability that half a million unemployed workers would bring.
Unemployment could rise to 15 per cent next year, a figure last seen when the social partners agreed the first programme for national recovery in 1986. That contract – and the discipline displayed by the public and private sectors – laid the foundations for rapid economic growth. We can, with commitment and self-control, repeat that exercise. The alternative could knock a weak economic recovery off track and consign our people to years of high unemployment and social stagnation.
The choices are stark. And those who make them deserve reasoned support. A critical point has been reached in dealing with a burst property bubble, insolvency of the banks and the effects of recession. The Government should consult with Fine Gael and the Labour Party before making pivotal economic decisions. Those parties, in turn, have a responsibility to respond by placing the interests of the State above short-term political advantage.