The Minister for Finance, Mr McCreevy, has been strongly criticised by trade union leaders for his "casual" approach to the inflation problem.
Both the president of the ICTU, Ms Inez McCormack, and the general secretary of IMPACT, Mr Peter McLoone, questioned Mr McCreevy's political judgment, his budgetary policy and his commitment to social partnership when they addressed the opening debate on national bargaining and pay at the union's annual conference in Tralee.
Replying to the debate, Mr McLoone said the ICTU had "already presented corrective measures to the Government to reduce the inflation figure". While some of the inflation problems were related to external factors such as the price of oil and a weak euro, other factors were self-inflicted, he said, adding that they largely resulted from a budgetary strategy last December which again ignored trade union advice to weigh benefits in favour of people on low incomes.
"We are due to meet the Government again in two weeks and the message that must go from this conference to the Minister for Finance is fairly simple. Unless there is concrete evidence at the June meeting that they have taken steps to reduce inflation, they, the Government, must accept full responsibility for the instability on the wages front that will inevitably follow."
It was "utterly unacceptable" for the Minister for Finance, as he did in the Dail, to revise casually inflation projections for the economy upwards and do nothing about it. The message to Mr McCreevy from the conference, he said, "is that inflation will not fall by divine intervention".
People were now seriously questioning Mr McCreevy's judgment as Minister for Finance, Mr McLoone said. Workers were tired of the Minister's lectures on the need to stick to agreements when there was no evidence that he was doing anything to ensure the Government met its half of the national agreement.
"Two weeks ago the Taoiseach said - and he was repeating an assurance given in the negotiations [on the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness] - that inflation would reduce and average 3 per cent or less over the lifetime of this agreement.
"It's now time for action. Nothing less will be acceptable, and we have to say to the Government that unless you meet the commitments and assurances given in February, this agreement, and social partnership, will not sustain. Delivery has to be two-edged and it is your turn now to deliver."
Ms McCormack strongly endorsed Mr McLoone's stance in her conference address. She said social partnership agreements that did not bring the benefits of our economic prosperity to everyone were only "expanding the golden circle" of privilege.
On inflation, she said: "The core of the social partnership deal, as I understand it, is that we all accept our responsibilities for the commitments we gave - you're as good as your word. That's the basis on which I understood people gave their commitments at political level."
If the Government "cannot keep its word, which it gave through those arrangements, to ensure a standard of living commensurate with the deal we made, then the deal is seriously at risk".
She added: "I completely support Mr McLoone and IMPACT in the strong message of warning that we want to be part of building a serious and inclusive future. But that requires responsible interventions by Government to give full support for the position outlined by IMPACT."
Earlier, delegates criticised the failure of the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness to provide higher flat-rate increases for the low paid. They also called for the national minimum wage to be raised.